Github user keith-turner commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/68#discussion_r52669078
--- Diff:
server/master/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/master/Master.java ---
@@ -1336,7 +1332,11 @@ public void assignedTablet(KeyExtent extent) {
}
@Override
- public Collection<KeyExtent> migrations() {
- return migrations.keySet();
+ public Set<KeyExtent> migrations() {
+ Set<KeyExtent> migrationsCopy = new HashSet<KeyExtent>();
+ synchronized (migrations) {
+ migrationsCopy.addAll(migrations.keySet());
+ }
+ return migrationsCopy;
--- End diff --
My thinking is that we don't expect the caller to modify it. Now that a
copy is made, its ok if caller modifies. But if in the future the
implementation uses a concurrent map and does not copy, would not want caller
of method to modify. Also the previous implementation didn't expect caller to
modify, just read.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
