CodingCat commented on code in PR #2366:
URL: https://github.com/apache/celeborn/pull/2366#discussion_r1541128085
##########
common/src/main/scala/org/apache/celeborn/common/rpc/netty/Inbox.scala:
##########
@@ -179,13 +198,12 @@ private[celeborn] class Inbox(
}
}
- def post(message: InboxMessage): Unit = inbox.synchronized {
+ def post(message: InboxMessage): Unit = {
Review Comment:
it is doable...
but I think given we already have built-in data structure to support
"blocking when no capacity" with a simple `put()` call , we may not want to
introduce a "not-that-elegant" way to handle this ?
regarding `it can happen that message be added into the queue after stop. `,
I don't think it will happen IIUC?
inbox.stop() was called by dispatcher.stop() which was synchronized at
dispatcher object, so we don't really need to synchronize here?
--
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]
