[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6651?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13474366#comment-13474366
]
Ted Yu commented on HBASE-6651:
-------------------------------
Please use dos2unix or similar tool to remove trailing ^M's from the patch.
{code}
+ * the type {@code V} is assumed that different instances of it are not
equal.^M
+ */^M
[email protected]^M
[email protected]^M
+public class ReusableSharedMap<K, V> extends AbstractSharedMap<K, V> {^M
{code}
Did you mean 'the type {@code V} assumes that ...' above ?
Suggest tagging the class with @InterfaceStability.Evolving instead of Unstable
{code}
+ * Registers a new instance to this instance.^M
{code}
Suggest changing the above to 'a new Key/Value pair to this instance'.
{code}
+ * If this method returns false, the the registration of the given object
expires.^M
+ * You might have to tear down the rejected object.^M
+ *^M
+ * @throws NullPointerException if {@code key} or {@code value} is null^M
+ */^M
+ boolean returnObject(K key, V value);^M
{code}
Can you tell us under what scenario returnObject() would cause given object to
expire ?
I see the following check recurring in the patch:
{code}
+ if (counter == null || counter.value != value) {^M
{code}
Should value.equals() be used instead ?
Using https://reviews.apache.org would facilitate code review. You should
select hbase-git repository.
> Thread safety of HTablePool is doubtful
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-6651
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6651
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Client
> Affects Versions: 0.94.1
> Reporter: Hiroshi Ikeda
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: HBASE-6651.patch, sample.zip, sample.zip,
> sharedmap_for_hbaseclient.zip
>
>
> There are some operations in HTablePool to access to PoolMap in multiple
> times without any explict synchronization.
> For example HTablePool.closeTablePool() calles PoolMap.values(), and calles
> PoolMap.remove(). If other threads add new instances to the pool in the
> middle of the calls, the new added instances might be dropped.
> (HTablePool.closeTablePool() also has another problem that calling it by
> multple threads causes accessing HTable by multiple threads.)
> Moreover, PoolMap is not thread safe for the same reason.
> For example PoolMap.put() calles ConcurrentMap.get() and calles
> ConcurrentMap.put(). If other threads add a new instance to the concurent map
> in the middle of the calls, the new instance might be dropped.
> And also implementations of Pool have the same problems.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
