Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9
+1 On Oct 27, 2020 3:00 PM, Donal Evans wrote: +1 From: Anthony Baker Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 2:53 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9 +1 from me > On Oct 27, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Xiaojian Zhou wrote: > > Hi, all: > > The fix is to resolve a hang when Connection called notifyHandshakeWaiter the > 2nd time and cleared the NioFilter’s unwrapped buffer by mistake. > > The 2nd call should consider if the 1st call has finished handshake. If yes, > do nothing. The fix is fully tested and has no risk. This problem exists in > earlier versions and should be backported. > > Regards > > Xiaojian Zhou
Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9
+1 From: Anthony Baker Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 2:53 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9 +1 from me > On Oct 27, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Xiaojian Zhou wrote: > > Hi, all: > > The fix is to resolve a hang when Connection called notifyHandshakeWaiter the > 2nd time and cleared the NioFilter’s unwrapped buffer by mistake. > > The 2nd call should consider if the 1st call has finished handshake. If yes, > do nothing. The fix is fully tested and has no risk. This problem exists in > earlier versions and should be backported. > > Regards > > Xiaojian Zhou
Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9
+1 from me > On Oct 27, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Xiaojian Zhou wrote: > > Hi, all: > > The fix is to resolve a hang when Connection called notifyHandshakeWaiter the > 2nd time and cleared the NioFilter’s unwrapped buffer by mistake. > > The 2nd call should consider if the 1st call has finished handshake. If yes, > do nothing. The fix is fully tested and has no risk. This problem exists in > earlier versions and should be backported. > > Regards > > Xiaojian Zhou
