Michael Han commented on ZOOKEEPER-2439:

Should we check ACL in FinalRequestProcessor? Because of total ordering 
guarantee, proposal on changing ACL should be committed when 
FinalRequestProcessor is processing the create node proposal - note we already 
check ACL in FinalRequestProcessor 
 for some ops, but not all, not sure why. 

> The order of asynchronous setACL is not correct.
> ------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-2439
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2439
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 3.4.8, 3.5.1
>         Environment: Linux Ubuntu
> Mac OS X
>            Reporter: Kazuaki Banzai
>              Labels: acl
>         Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-2439-WIP.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2439.patch
> Within a given client connection, the execution of commands on the ZooKeeper 
> server is always ordered, as both synchronous and asynchronous commands are 
> dispatched through queuePacket (directly or indirectly).
> In other words, Zookeeper guarantees sequential consistency: updates from a 
> client will be applied in the order that they were sent.
> However, the order of asynchronous setACL is not correct on Ubuntu.
> When asynchronous setACL is called BEFORE another API is called, asynchronous 
> setACL is applied AFTER another API.
> For example, if a client calls
> (1) asynchronous setACL to remove all permissions of node "/" and
> (2) synchronous create to create node "/a",
> synchronous create should fail, but it succeeds on Ubuntu.
> (We can see all permissions of node "/" are removed when the client calls 
> getACL to node "/" after (2), so (1) is applied AFTER (2). If we call getACL 
> between (1) and (2), the synchronous case works correctly but the 
> asynchronous case still produces the bug.)
> The attached unit test reproduces this scenario. It fails on Linux Ubuntu but 
> succeeds on Mac OS X. If used on a heavily loaded server on Mac OS, the test 
> sometimes fails as well but only rarely.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to