[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Thomas D'Silva updated PHOENIX-5246:
------------------------------------
Description:
By [~elserj] on PHOENIX-5070:
This looks to me that the getAccessControllers() method is not correctly
implementing the double-checked locking "approach" as per
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-checked_locking#Usage_in_Java (the
accessControllers variable must be volatile).
If we want to avoid taking an explicit lock, what about using AtomicReference
instead? Can we spin out another Jira issue to fix that?
was: as per
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-checked_locking#Usage_in_Java (the
accessControllers variable must be volatile.
> PhoenixAccessControllers.getAccessControllers() method is not correctly
> implementing the double-checked locking
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-5246
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5246
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 4.14.0
> Reporter: Thomas D'Silva
> Priority: Major
> Labels: SFDC
> Fix For: 4.15.0, 5.1.0, 4.14.2
>
>
> By [~elserj] on PHOENIX-5070:
> This looks to me that the getAccessControllers() method is not correctly
> implementing the double-checked locking "approach" as per
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-checked_locking#Usage_in_Java (the
> accessControllers variable must be volatile).
> If we want to avoid taking an explicit lock, what about using AtomicReference
> instead? Can we spin out another Jira issue to fix that?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
