[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-164?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14514999#comment-14514999
]
Jordan Zimmerman commented on CURATOR-164:
------------------------------------------
* There are lots of classes named Entry. So, I disagree
* "Should updateService be throwing an Exception" - I thought about that too.
In the old implementation, you'd get a KeeperException.NoNode when setData()
was called. In the new implementation, we need to get the Entry instance in
order to get the service. So, this seems like a reasonable change.
* "internalUnregisterService, that looks almost like a double-checked locking"
- but it's not. Just making sure we don't get an NPE.
> curator-x-discovery: unregisterService is not guaranteed to remove the
> service, due to reconnectListener concurrency issue
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CURATOR-164
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-164
> Project: Apache Curator
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Framework
> Affects Versions: 2.7.0
> Reporter: Rasmus Berg Palm
> Assignee: Jordan Zimmerman
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 2.8.0
>
>
> In ServiceDiscoveryImpl:
> When unregistering a service, the reconnect listener might fire while
> deleting the path.
> This can cause a condition where the delete finishes successfully, the
> service is removed from services, and then the reRegisterServices completes
> successfully and the service is added back in ZK and in services, end result
> being that the service was not removed, even though unregisterService did not
> throw any exceptions.
> Essentially the use of the internal 'services' cache makes for a nightmare of
> concurrency issues. I put this as critical as the library it's really not
> usable IMO.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
