EdColeman commented on PR #3202: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3202#issuecomment-1454047105
The use in tests seems to contradict the assumption that the intent was to leverage the side effect of pausing the full duration - but rather it looks like it was used as a convenience to avoid handling or explicitly throwing InterruptedException. Because of the number of places that sleepUninterrupty is used made this PR very large and hard to review. I did not expect the push-back, but do understand the concern. Basically I think the default should be to bail when an interrupt occurs unless in very specific cases where is can be handled. In the future, we should be on the look out for new uses of sleepUninterrupty and at a minimum require documentation that the side effect is necessary for correct operation. There are other places with busy loop that seem like they would benefit from explicitly recognizing the interrupt status and those can be handled on a case by case basis. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
