[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1212?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15385623#comment-15385623
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on JENA-1212:
--------------------------------------
Github user ehedgehog commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/157
I don't see that an AtomicBoolean has any advantage over a volatile
variable in this code. The only changes made are setting `cancelled` (the
volatile boolean) from `false` (initial value) to `true` when `cancel()` is
called. Once it's true it stays true. And the only place it is written to and
read from from is within AbortableComparator itself.
Is volatile perhaps not noisy enough to trigger a reader's notice?
Chris
> allow ORDER BY sort to be cancelled
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-1212
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1212
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: ARQ
> Reporter: christopher james dollin
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Jena 3.1.1
>
>
> When a query with an ORDER BY is cancelled, the component
> Arrays.sort() that sorts the chunk(s) of the result
> bindings runs to completion before the cancel finishes.
> [See QueryIterSort and SortedDataBag.]
> For a large result set, this results in a long wait
> before the cancelled request finally finishes. This
> can be inconvenient.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
