LakshSingla commented on code in PR #16372: URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/16372#discussion_r1588285146
########## processing/src/test/java/org/apache/druid/query/groupby/GroupByResourcesReservationPoolTest.java: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,174 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, + * software distributed under the License is distributed on an + * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY + * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the + * specific language governing permissions and limitations + * under the License. + */ + +package org.apache.druid.query.groupby; + +import com.google.common.collect.ImmutableList; +import com.google.common.collect.ImmutableMap; +import org.apache.druid.collections.BlockingPool; +import org.apache.druid.collections.DefaultBlockingPool; +import org.apache.druid.java.util.common.Intervals; +import org.apache.druid.java.util.common.concurrent.Execs; +import org.apache.druid.java.util.common.granularity.Granularities; +import org.apache.druid.query.QueryResourceId; +import org.apache.druid.query.dimension.DefaultDimensionSpec; +import org.junit.Assert; +import org.junit.Test; + +import java.nio.ByteBuffer; +import java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch; +import java.util.concurrent.ExecutorService; + +public class GroupByResourcesReservationPoolTest +{ + + /** + * This test confirms that the interleaved GroupByResourcesReservationPool.reserve() and GroupByResourcesReservationPool.clean() + * between multiple threads succeed. It is specifically designed to test the case when the operations are interleaved in the + * following manner: + * <p> + * THREAD1 THREAD2 + * pool.reserve(query1) + * pool.reserve(query2) + * pool.clean(query1) + * <p> + * This test assumes a few things about the implementation of the interfaces, which are laid out in the comments. + * <p> + * The test should complete under 10 seconds, and the majority of the time would be consumed by waiting for the thread + * that sleeps for 5 seconds Review Comment: > Is it possible to rewrite this test to not use a sleep? The problem I am running into at this point is that I want to signal to Thread1 that Thread2 has called the `reserve()` operation, however, the reserve() itself is blocking. I have tried the polling approach, using synchronized blocks and the current method, however they all run into the same blocker - there's no way to signal from a thread that it has called a blocking operation (before its completion). Any suggestions on how I can achieve this? Else I'll annotate the test with @Ignore -- 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: commits-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@druid.apache.org
