> On Feb. 24, 2016, 7:15 p.m., Josh Elser wrote: > > core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/client/impl/TabletServerBatchWriter.java, > > line 967 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/43957/diff/1/?file=1268376#file1268376line967> > > > > Can be `final` now. Also, why the upgrade to Long?
mutation.estimateMemoryUsed() returns a long and we were truncating to an int. On Feb. 24, 2016, 7:15 p.m., Dave Marion wrote: > > I'm trying to look at the big picture here as well, but I'm not sure that > > this change actually helps the synchronization. It seems like every call to > > `startProcessing` is made by a `synchronized` method (flush, addMutation, > > close, addFailedMutations) or while holding > > `TabletServerBatchWriter.class`'s lock. Am I missing something? Ah, yes. I believe that I can remove the synchronized block in the jtimer now. I'm trying to hold off from removing synchronized modifiers from the other methods, but I think I can do it from addMutation now - Dave ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43957/#review120541 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 24, 2016, 7:29 p.m., Dave Marion wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/43957/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 24, 2016, 7:29 p.m.) > > > Review request for accumulo and Josh Elser. > > > Repository: accumulo > > > Description > ------- > > ACCUMULO-1755: removed synchronized modifier from > TabletServerBatchWriterstartProcessing() > > > Diffs > ----- > > > core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/client/impl/TabletServerBatchWriter.java > bc90d00 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43957/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > unit tests in core pass > > > Thanks, > > Dave Marion > >
