[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6130?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15972736#comment-15972736
]
mingleizhang edited comment on FLINK-6130 at 4/18/17 2:10 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------
[~till.rohrmann] Void ? I see. I would think {code}@GuardedBy("lock){code}
might a wrong as well. Could we do a refine like the following ?
Change the code
{code}
@GuardedBy("lock")
private ResourceManager resourceManager;
{code}
to
{code}
private volatile ResourceManager resourceManager;
{code}
[~Zentol] FYI. Thanks and appreciate it.
was (Author: mingleizhang):
[~till.rohrmann] Void ? I see. I would think {code}@GuardedBy("lock){code}
might a wrong as well. Could we do a refine like the following ?
Change the code
{code}
@GuardedBy("lock")
private ResourceManager resourceManager;
{code}
to
{code}
private volatile ResourceManager resourceManager;
{code}
> Consider calling resourceManager#getTerminationFuture() with lock held
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-6130
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6130
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Ted Yu
> Assignee: mingleizhang
> Priority: Minor
>
> In YarnFlinkApplicationMasterRunner#runApplicationMaster() :
> {code}
> synchronized (lock) {
> LOG.info("Starting High Availability Services");
> ...
> }
> // wait for resource manager to finish
> resourceManager.getTerminationFuture().get();
> {code}
> resourceManager#getTerminationFuture() is called without holding lock.
> We should store the value returned from
> resourceManager#getTerminationFuture() inside the synchronized block.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
