On 4/11/11 7:46 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi Core-Libs developers,
I'd like to solicit some advice and discussion about this bug and a potential
fix I'm cooking for it. Here is the bug report; it contains details about the
problem and my analysis of it:
On 4/20/11 9:00 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi all,
Please review an updated webrev for this bug:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/6896297/webrev.1/
Using ConcurrentHashMap is much nicer in many ways, and it seems to resolve
the JCK failures at least as well as the
Hi Stuart,
On Apr 19, 2011, at 6:35 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
Please review an updated webrev for this bug:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/6896297/webrev.1/
Using ConcurrentHashMap is much nicer in many ways, and it seems to resolve
the JCK failures at least as well as the
Hi all,
Please review an updated webrev for this bug:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/6896297/webrev.1/
Using ConcurrentHashMap is much nicer in many ways, and it seems to resolve the
JCK failures at least as well as the previous fix did. This does nothing to
remedy the issue of
Stuart Marks wrote:
:
The key issue seems to be whether we want to preserve compatibility of
the serialized form. If we care about compatibility of the serialized
form, #3 is probably the safest. If somebody comes along and tells us
that we don't have to worry about serial compatibility of
Hi David,
Thanks for your notes and analysis. Good point about the temporary
inconsistency between groupEntry and groupTable. With the change, there's a
brief moment where a GroupEntry in the registered state can be observed to be
absent from the groupTable, which wasn't possible before. I
Hi Core-Libs developers,
I'd like to solicit some advice and discussion about this bug and a potential
fix I'm cooking for it. Here is the bug report; it contains details about the
problem and my analysis of it:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6896297
and here's a webrev
Hi Stuart,
I can't answer your specific questions as I'm not familiar with the RMI
infrastructure either. Taking the lock in writeObject and moving
group.unregister out of the sync block to avoid deadlock seems
reasonable. The main question to ask with such a move is whether the
temporary
