[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3513?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15388166#comment-15388166
]
Andrey Gura commented on IGNITE-3513:
-------------------------------------
I see two possible solutions:
* {{CleanupWorker}} can sleep for little periods of time and periodically
call {{expire()}} method.
* {{GridCacheTtlManager.addTrackedEntry()}} method can check some volatile
field with nearest expiration time and notify {{CleanupWorker}} in case when
added entry has expiration time less than nearest expiration time. It requires
usage of synchronization for {{wait/notify}} and can lead to contention in case
when added entries have decreasing sequence of expiration time values. See
commit
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/880/commits/f3261b50f17848339b141a900f8c97a61bdbc7ca
> Cleanup worker is placed in the Thread's waiting queue using Thread.sleep
> method
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IGNITE-3513
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3513
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 1.6
> Reporter: Denis Magda
> Assignee: Andrey Gura
> Fix For: 1.7
>
>
> There is a bug in current implementation of
> {{GridCacheTtlManager#CleanupWorker}}.
> Refer to the implementation's code snippet and the details below.
> {code}
> EntryWrapper first = pendingEntries.firstx();
> if (first != null) {
> long waitTime = first.expireTime - U.currentTimeMillis();
> if (waitTime > 0)
> U.sleep(waitTime);
> }
> {code}
> 1. Put first item with TTL = 1 hour. CleanupWorker will go to sleep for 1
> hour.
> 2. Put second item with TTL = 1 minute. Since
> CleanupWorker's thread sleeps now, second item will not be expired at the
> time.
> NOTE: This scenario is easily to reproducible if first and second items are
> put into cache asynchronously. If try to put them in same thread one-by-one
> expiration may work fine.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
