[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-3477?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17254074#comment-17254074
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on JAMES-3477:
---------------------------------------
jeantil commented on pull request #281:
URL: https://github.com/apache/james-project/pull/281#issuecomment-750293565
I don't know if we should document it:
This is really an internal implementation detail, should it really be
configurable (adding configuration means the already complex code becomes even
more complex)
I only introduced the flag to let *us* more easily benchmark both
implementations.
I feel the loosing implementation should simply be removed once we have the
benchmarks results as there is no point in leaving an inferior implementation
in the code.
I'll update the comment to reflect that instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
> MimeMessageCopyOnWriteProxy is not thread safe
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JAMES-3477
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-3477
> Project: James Server
> Issue Type: Wish
> Reporter: Benoit Tellier
> Priority: Major
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg69221.html
> &
> https://github.com/jeantil/james-project/commit/c0354ea21c5b0a8f6d46e9919f7db0d97db9eb23
> proves there is a concurrency issue in MimeMessageCopyOnWriteProxy class that
> we need to investigate.
> It causes our test suite to be flacky.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
