Abacn commented on code in PR #28122:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/28122#discussion_r1303305418
##########
sdks/java/io/google-cloud-platform/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/io/gcp/bigtable/BigtableServiceFactory.java:
##########
@@ -75,15 +76,15 @@ static BigtableServiceEntry create(ConfigId configId,
BigtableService service) {
@Override
public void close() {
- int refCount =
- refCounts.getOrDefault(getConfigId().id(), new
AtomicInteger(0)).decrementAndGet();
- if (refCount < 0) {
- LOG.error(
- "close() Ref count is < 0, configId=" + getConfigId().id() + "
refCount=" + refCount);
- }
- LOG.debug("close() for config id " + getConfigId().id() + ", ref count
is " + refCount);
- if (refCount == 0) {
- synchronized (lock) {
+ synchronized (lock) {
+ int refCount =
+ refCounts.getOrDefault(getConfigId().id(), new
AtomicInteger(0)).decrementAndGet();
+ if (refCount < 0) {
+ LOG.error(
+ "close() Ref count is < 0, configId=" + getConfigId().id() + "
refCount=" + refCount);
+ }
+ LOG.debug("close() for config id " + getConfigId().id() + ", ref count
is " + refCount);
+ if (refCount == 0) {
Review Comment:
concurrent programming can be tricky. It makes sense to me that move the
lock here could resolve the race condition. However, is there any harm if make
the entire close() function synchronized?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
