[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-525?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17072143#comment-17072143
]
Chao Chu commented on CURATOR-525:
----------------------------------
[~randgalt] I will try to create a PR later today.
>don't go to LOST unless the client.isConnected() is true?
I meant "don't generate a LOST" if client is actually connected, when the state
came from codeToState(...)
>What really should happen is that the connection should be forced closed.
what does the "connection" mean in this case? The underlying zk connection in
ClientCnxn was indeed in the process of closing, the 'cleanup' was processing
the responses in the pendingQueue.
> There is a race condition in Curator which might lead to fake SUSPENDED event
> and ruin CuratorFrameworkImpl inner state
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CURATOR-525
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-525
> Project: Apache Curator
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Framework
> Affects Versions: 4.2.0
> Reporter: Mikhail Valiev
> Priority: Critical
> Attachments: CuratorFrameworkTest.java,
> background-thread-infinite-loop.png, curator-race-condition.png,
> event-watcher-thread.png
>
>
> This was originally found in the 2.11.1 version of Curator, but I tested the
> latest release as well, and the issue is still there.
> The issue is tied to guaranteed deletes and how it loops infinitely, if
> called when there is no connection:
> client.delete().guaranteed().forPath(ourPath);
> [https://curator.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/curator/framework/api/GuaranteeableDeletable.html]
> This schedules a background operation which attempts to remove the node in
> infinite loop. Each time a background operation fails due to connection loss
> it performs a check (validateConnection() function) to see if the main thread
> is already aware of connection loss, and if it's not - raises the connection
> loss event. The problem is that this peace of code is also executed by the
> event watcher thread when connection events are happening - this leads to
> race condition. So when connection is restored it's easily possible for the
> main thread to raise RECONNECTED event and after that for background thread
> to raise SUSPENDED event.
> We might get unlucky and get a "phantom" SUSPENDED event. It breaks Curator
> inner Connection state and leads to curator behaving unpredictably
> Attached some illustrations and Unit test to reproduce the issue. (Put debug
> point in validateConnection() )
> *Possible solution*: in CuratorFrameworkImpl class adjust the processEvent()
> function and add the following:
> if(event.getType() == CuratorEventType.SYNC) {
> connectionStateManager.addStateChange(ConnectionState.RECONNECTED);
> }
> If this is a same state as before - it will be ignored, if background
> operation succeeded, but we are in SUSPENDED state - this would repair the
> Curator state and raise RECONNECTED event.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
