LZD-PratyushBhatt commented on code in PR #3052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/helix/pull/3052#discussion_r2191380415
##########
helix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/helix/participant/DistClusterControllerStateModel.java:
##########
@@ -62,7 +65,7 @@ public void onBecomeLeaderFromStandby(Message message,
NotificationContext conte
logger.info(controllerName + " becoming leader from standby for " +
clusterName);
- synchronized (_controllerOpt) {
+ synchronized (_controllerLock) {
Review Comment:
Appreciate the suggestion @junkaixue, that’s a fair point. I agree that
synchronized at method level on this would technically provide mutual exclusion
in this case.
I opted for a dedicated lock object (_controllerLock) to keep the
synchronization scope narrowly focused on controller lifecycle transitions, and
also I didnt want to change the already implemented dedicated lock logic. This
makes the locking intent more explicit and avoids potential contention if other
unrelated synchronized methods are ever added to this class (either now or
later, or lets say by mistake).
--
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
