[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/POOL-279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14165109#comment-14165109
]
Jacopo Cappellato commented on POOL-279:
----------------------------------------
[[email protected]] I can definitely refine the code in the tests: it is a
result of a few attempts to recreate consistently the issue and I know it is
not perfect. In particular, the return statements are not necessary but I have
added them to terminate earlier the test if the error condition is met. However
I didn't want to check the negativeIdleTimeReturned condition too often because
this would increase the serialization of threads. But, especially if you are
willing to commit the test in the trunk, I would be happy to clean it a bit.
As regards the fix: I agree that your simplified code is better.
> Thread concurrency issue in DefaultPooledObject.getIdleTimeMillis()
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: POOL-279
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/POOL-279
> Project: Commons Pool
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Jacopo Cappellato
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: POOL-279-unit-test.patch, POOL-279.patch,
> POOL-279.patch, POOL-279.patch, POOL-279.patch
>
>
> Under unlucky thread concurrency the getIdleTimeMillis() method of
> DefaultPooledObject can return a negative value.
> I have attached a Junit test that fails most of the times and a simple fix,
> that doesn't use synchronization: with this fix the Junit test always succeed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
