[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-495?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16721704#comment-16721704
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on CURATOR-495:
----------------------------------------
Github user eolivelli commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/curator/pull/297#discussion_r241856741
--- Diff:
curator-framework/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/CuratorFramework.java
---
@@ -331,4 +329,29 @@
* @return true/false
*/
boolean isZk34CompatibilityMode();
+
+ /**
+ * Calls {@link #notifyAll()} on the given object after first
synchronizing on it. This is
+ * done from the {@link #runSafe(Runnable)} thread.
+ *
+ * @param monitorHolder object to sync on and notify
+ * @since 4.1.0
+ */
+ default void postSafeNotify(Object monitorHolder)
--- End diff --
Thinking about the future...
Would it be better to make it return a CompletableFuture?
This way the caller will have a chance to know when eventually the
operation has been executed
> Race and possible dead locks with RetryPolicies and several Curator Recipes
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CURATOR-495
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-495
> Project: Apache Curator
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Recipes
> Affects Versions: 4.0.1
> Reporter: Jordan Zimmerman
> Assignee: Jordan Zimmerman
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 4.1.0
>
>
> In trying to figure out why {{TestInterProcessSemaphoreMutex}} is so flakey
> I've come across a fairly serious edge case in how several of our recipes
> work. You can see the issue in {{InterProcessSemaphoreV2}} (which is what
> {{InterProcessSemaphoreMutex}} uses internally). Look here:
> [InterProcessSemaphoreV2.java|https://github.com/apache/curator/blob/master/curator-recipes/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/recipes/locks/InterProcessSemaphoreV2.java#L373]
> The code synchronizes and then does {{client.getChildren()...}}. This is
> where the problem is. If there are connection problems inside of
> getChildren() the retry policy will do configured sleeping, retries, etc.
> Importantly, this is all done while the thread doing the retries holds
> InterProcessSemaphoreV2's monitor. If the ZK connection is repaired past the
> session timeout, ZK will eventually call InterProcessSemaphoreV2's watcher
> with an Expired message. InterProcessSemaphoreV2's watcher calls this method:
> {code}
> private synchronized void notifyFromWatcher()
> {
> notifyAll();
> }
> {code}
> You can see that this is a race. The thread doing "getChildren" is holding
> the monitor and is in a retry loop waiting for the connection to be repaired.
> However, ZK's event loop is trying to obtain that same monitor as a result of
> trying to call the synchronized notifyFromWatcher(). This means that the
> retry policy will always fail because ZK's event loop is tied up until that
> thread exists. Worse still, if someone were to use a retry policy of
> "RetryForever" they'd have a deadlock.
> This pattern is in about 10 files or so. I'm trying to think of a workaround.
> One possibility is to use a separate thread for this type of notification.
> i.e. notifyFromWatcher() would just signal another thread that the
> notifyAll() needs to be called. This would unblock ZK's event thread so that
> things can progress. I'll play around with this.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
