[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-936?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13215429#comment-13215429
]
[email protected] commented on FLUME-936:
-----------------------------------------------------
bq. On 2012-02-21 06:40:54, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
bq. > Thanks for the patch Juhani. Can you please rebase it and update the
review? It is not applying cleanly for MemoryChannel.java.
bq. >
bq.
bq. Juhani Connolly wrote:
bq. I just diffed patch-3 and patch-4(from my updated diff below) and they
appear to be identical.
bq. Can you paste the output of the failed apply attempt?
bq.
bq. Juhani Connolly wrote:
bq. just to be totally sure, I did a fresh svn checkout/patch and it was
fine.
bq.
bq. 1032 mkdir flume
bq. 1033 cd flume
bq. 1034 svn checkout
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/flume/branches/flume-728/
bq. 1035 cd flume-728/
bq. 1037 patch -p1 < ~/workspace/flume/FLUME-936-4.patch
bq. 1038 mvn test
Thanks Juhani. I probably did not apply the patch correctly or had some local
changes at the time that may have caused conflict. Since I do not have the
workspace now I cannot say for sure what the problem was. However, since the
patch was committed, chances are there was no problem and it was a pilot error
on my part. Thanks for making doubly sure of it though.
- Arvind
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3704/#review5234
-----------------------------------------------------------
On 2012-02-21 06:51:00, Juhani Connolly wrote:
bq.
bq. -----------------------------------------------------------
bq. This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
bq. https://reviews.apache.org/r/3704/
bq. -----------------------------------------------------------
bq.
bq. (Updated 2012-02-21 06:51:00)
bq.
bq.
bq. Review request for Flume.
bq.
bq.
bq. Summary
bq. -------
bq.
bq. This is an initial go at fixing the threading issues with memory channel.
bq.
bq. It uses the preliminary work on FLUME-935 and I have included the code
from that.
bq.
bq. The tagging of the events became unnecessary so I dropped that. One thing
that concerns me slightly is how to deal with not having enough space in the
queue to rollback failed takes. One method would be to keep a minimum buffer of
transactionCapacity. Another would be to implement the queue of queues as
suggested in FLUME-889
bq.
bq. Anyway, just putting up this early version to see what people think
bq.
bq.
bq. This addresses bug FLUME-936.
bq. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-936
bq.
bq.
bq. Diffs
bq. -----
bq.
bq. flume-ng-core/src/main/java/org/apache/flume/channel/MemoryChannel.java
6a17f06
bq.
flume-ng-core/src/test/java/org/apache/flume/channel/TestMemoryChannel.java
b44030e
bq.
flume-ng-core/src/test/java/org/apache/flume/channel/TestMemoryChannelConcurrency.java
PRE-CREATION
bq.
flume-ng-core/src/test/java/org/apache/flume/channel/TestMemoryChannelTransaction.java
d18045b
bq. flume-ng-core/src/test/java/org/apache/flume/source/TestExecSource.java
3014368
bq.
flume-ng-node/src/test/java/org/apache/flume/source/TestNetcatSource.java
9e465e1
bq.
bq. Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3704/diff
bq.
bq.
bq. Testing
bq. -------
bq.
bq. The original tests pass, though I had to take out the state checks because
of the changes to semantics from the flume-935 code. I also had to add a
transaction.close statement where semantics were not properly being followed
bq. I have to retrofit my new concurrency test since without the tagged events
it cannot fail without checking that the content is correct. I'll put that up
asap, just wanted to get some eyes on this before I head out.
bq.
bq.
bq. Thanks,
bq.
bq. Juhani
bq.
bq.
> MemoryChannel is not thread safe
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: FLUME-936
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-936
> Project: Flume
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Channel
> Affects Versions: NG alpha 2
> Reporter: Juhani Connolly
> Assignee: Juhani Connolly
> Fix For: v1.1.0
>
> Attachments: FLUME-936-3.patch, FLUME-936-4.patch,
> FLUME-936-unittest.patch
>
>
> The memory channel isn't thread safe as a couple of parallel transactions can
> commit/rollback each others entries if called in the wrong order.
> I'm attaching a unit test I made that demonstrates it using a cyclicbarrier
> to force the event order that causes the precondition to fail.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
