-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/50538/#review143848
-----------------------------------------------------------


Ship it!




Ship It!

- anilkumar gingade


On July 27, 2016, 10:59 p.m., Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/50538/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 27, 2016, 10:59 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Hitesh Khamesra and Udo Kohlmeyer.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-1619
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-1619
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> On the server side we iterate over a bucket-location map held in 
> RegionAdvisor for a partitioned region.  When this map is updated it is 
> cleared and completely repopulated but there is nothing preventing other 
> threads from reading the map while this is going on.  Consequently another 
> thread could see an empty or partially-filled collection and report the wrong 
> information to a client about where to go for a single-hop operation.
> 
> The fix is to create a new collection and replace the old collection with the 
> new, updated one.  Since the old collection is never modified I've changed it 
> from a ConcurrentHashMap to a HashMap.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/com/gemstone/gemfire/internal/cache/BucketAdvisor.java
>  5fc9bb06367578035337faa30daac50e015a0b44 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/com/gemstone/gemfire/internal/cache/partitioned/RegionAdvisor.java
>  8305a0d0cd4f126de77f99c6bd539f5bf72666f1 
>   
> geode-core/src/test/java/com/gemstone/gemfire/internal/cache/PartitionedRegionSingleHopWithServerGroupDUnitTest.java
>  3195b3512d02d12b449c4c089234f03bb2d55bf1 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/50538/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bruce Schuchardt
> 
>

Reply via email to