[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-330?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12602057#action_12602057
]
Oliver Heger commented on CONFIGURATION-330:
--------------------------------------------
I would prefer an approach as used by the Java collections framework: keep the
basic configuration implementations free of any synchronization stuff, but
provide a means for obtaining a synchronized instance. This way a user can
choose whether synchronization is needed or not.
Using ReadWriteLock would complicate the code and would not be necessary for
many use cases.
Maybe proxies could be used for implementing this feature. (Proxies could also
be useful for other features, e.g. read-only configurations.)
> Thread safety for file based configurations
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CONFIGURATION-330
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONFIGURATION-330
> Project: Commons Configuration
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 1.5
> Reporter: Emmanuel Bourg
> Fix For: 2.0
>
>
> When autoSave is enabled on a FileConfiguration it's quite frequent to run
> into a ConcurrentModificationException, simply because setProperty is called
> from a thread while another thread is saving the configuration.
> I suggest to leverage the ReadWriteLock in Java 5 to solve this issue. The
> read lock is acquired in getProperty(), and the write lock is acquired in
> setProperty().
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
