[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-151?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14165380#comment-14165380
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on CURATOR-151:
----------------------------------------
Github user dragonsinth commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/curator/pull/47#discussion_r18659175
--- Diff:
curator-recipes/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/recipes/shared/SharedValue.java
---
@@ -184,6 +178,25 @@ public boolean trySetValue(VersionedValue<byte[]>
newValue) throws Exception
return false;
}
+ private void updateValue(int version, byte[] bytes)
+ {
+ while (true)
+ {
+ VersionedValue<byte[]> current = currentValue.get();
+ if (current.getVersion() >= version)
+ {
+ // A newer version was concurrently set.
+ return;
+ }
+ if ( currentValue.compareAndSet(current, new
VersionedValue<byte[]>(version, bytes)) )
+ {
+ // Successfully set.
+ return;
+ }
+ // Lost a race, retry.
+ }
+ }
+
/**
--- End diff --
Let me elaborate a little on the race condition this solves.
Imagine the current value is (1, A) you have one thread calling
trySetValue(B) another calling trySetValue(C) at the same time. Imagine thread
1 succeeds in making the server call first and updating the server value to (2,
B) and immediately afterwards thread 2 succeeds in calling the server and
updating the server value to (3, C). But to due to thread scheduling or what
have you, both threads actually enter updateValue() at the same time. How do
we ensure that the correct value ends up in currentValue when both threads exit
updateValue so that the client has the correct server state?
That's what the compare-and-set loop solves. Imagine both threads enter
the loop and initially read current as (1, A). Then they both try to compare
and set (1, A) to either (2, B) or (3, C). Only one of them can win the race.
If (2, B) gets set, then the first thread will return and the second thread
will try again, and this time succeed in updating (2, B) -> (3, C). If (3, C)
gets set then the second thread will return, and the first thread will try
again. But this time it will exit out because it will see that someone else
already set a higher-versioned value.
This actually solves several potential races, between threads calling
setValue/trySetValue at the same time and also any threads that could be
calling readValue() at the same time (watcher, failed trySetValue(), or even
the start() call).
> SharedValue has limited utility but can be improved
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CURATOR-151
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-151
> Project: Apache Curator
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Recipes
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Jordan Zimmerman
> Assignee: Jordan Zimmerman
> Fix For: 2.7.0
>
>
> Currently, SharedValue has limited utility as the internally managed version
> is always used for trySetValue. A good improvement would be a) add an API to
> get the current value AND current version and b) add an alternate trySetValue
> that takes a new value AND an expected version.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
