keith-turner commented on code in PR #6025:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/6025#discussion_r2640451875
##########
server/tserver/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/tserver/tablet/Scanner.java:
##########
@@ -24,23 +24,22 @@
import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean;
import java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock;
+import javax.annotation.concurrent.NotThreadSafe;
+
import org.apache.accumulo.core.data.Key;
import org.apache.accumulo.core.data.Range;
import org.apache.accumulo.core.data.Value;
import org.apache.accumulo.core.iterators.SortedKeyValueIterator;
import
org.apache.accumulo.core.iteratorsImpl.system.IterationInterruptedException;
import org.apache.accumulo.core.iteratorsImpl.system.SourceSwitchingIterator;
-import org.apache.accumulo.core.trace.ScanInstrumentation;
-import org.apache.accumulo.core.trace.TraceUtil;
-import org.apache.accumulo.core.util.Pair;
import org.apache.accumulo.core.util.ShutdownUtil;
-import org.apache.accumulo.tserver.scan.NextBatchTask;
import org.apache.accumulo.tserver.scan.ScanParameters;
import org.slf4j.Logger;
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;
import com.google.common.base.Preconditions;
+@NotThreadSafe
public class Scanner {
Review Comment:
Yeah its fine as is because of the lock and should be suppressed, seems like
a false positive. Since a lock is held all memory changes made by another
thread should be seen and volatile would not be needed and would be misleading.
--
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]
