[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-495?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16721712#comment-16721712
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on CURATOR-495:
----------------------------------------

Github user Randgalt commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/curator/pull/297#discussion_r241859977
  
    --- 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 --
    
    Good idea - I'll add that


> 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)

Reply via email to