[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7575?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16344444#comment-16344444
]
John Bellassai commented on CXF-7575:
-------------------------------------
Sergey,
Yes, your breakdown is exactly the situation I was trying to describe.
I followed the trail of CXF-7037 and found
[this|https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg110682.html] thread
in the Tomcat mailing list in which the bug mentioned in CXF-7037 is discussed.
>From what I can tell, the issue in Tomcat was resolved at least in version
>8.5.6 (2016-10-10). Here is the relevant paragraph from the
>[changelog|[https://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-8.5-doc/changelog.html]:]
{quote}Refactor the code that implements the requirement that a call to
complete() or dispatch() made from a non-container thread before the container
initiated thread that called startAsync() completes must be delayed until the
container initiated thread has completed. Rather than implementing this by
blocking the non-container thread, extend the internal state machine to track
this. This removes the possibility that blocking the non-container thread could
trigger a deadlock. (markt)
{quote}
So, this would lead me to believe that it is safe to synchronize the
_doResumeFinal_ method now, at least as far as Tomcat is concerned.
> @Suspended race condition
> -------------------------
>
> Key: CXF-7575
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-7575
> Project: CXF
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JAX-RS
> Affects Versions: 3.1.14
> Reporter: John Bellassai
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: CXF-7575.patch
>
>
> There appears to be a race condition with the use of AsyncResponseImpl where
> my user thread can invoke resume() before initialSuspend is set to false by
> suspendContinuationIfNeeded() and therefore the resume() call does not
> actually resume the Continuation _and returns true_, indicating that the
> resume was successful even though it wasn't.
> I've spent all day trying to make sense of this problem and my understanding
> of how all of this works together is still a bit spotty, but it seems to me
> that AsyncResponseImpl.suspendContinuationIfNeeded() (or something similar)
> should be called _before_ invoking the JAXRS method. Right now, that method
> is only called after the JAXRS method is invoked by JAXRSInvoker so the
> instance of AsyncResponse passed into the JAXRS method appears to not
> actually get suspended (or perhaps _marked_ internally as suspended) until
> after the JAXRS method returns. If my async task happens to get finished
> very quickly and calls resume() before that happens, it fails silently.
> I seem to be able to circumvent this problem by running the following at the
> start of my JAXRS method (pseudo code):
> {code}
> @POST
> @Path(....)
> void myJaxrsMethod(@Suspended AsyncResponse asyncResponse, ...) {
> if(asyncResponse instanceof AsyncResponseImpl) {
> ((AsyncResponseImpl)asyncResponse).suspendContinuationIfNeeded()
> }
> Runnable asyncTask = createAsyncTask(asyncResponse)
> submitAsyncTask(asyncTask)
> }
> {code}
> which is why I suspect suspendContinuationIfNeeded() should be called before
> JAXRSInvoker invokes the JAXRS method.
> One of the things that made this really difficult to track down was that
> AsyncResponseImpl.resume() returns true even if the Continuation was not
> resumed! If you make it into doResumeFinal(), like was happening in my case,
> the return is always true even if cont.resume() is not called. So from user
> code, it looks like everything is ok, but the response never gets sent to the
> client.
> This seems somewhat related to the problems reported in CXF-7037
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
