[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9524?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15498410#comment-15498410 ]
Noble Paul commented on SOLR-9524: ---------------------------------- bq. fingerprint = maxVersionFingerprintCache.get(maxVersionFingerprintCache); LOL, nice bug. bq. May be we should hold off 6.2.1 release [~praste] I don't think it's a big deal. Essentially it's just made caching useless. We didn't have any caching till now. So, it is not going to be any worse than what it used to be > SolrIndexSearcher.getIndexFingerprint uses dubious sunchronization > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: SOLR-9524 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9524 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: Bug > Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) > Affects Versions: 6.3 > Reporter: Mike Drob > Attachments: SOLR-9524.patch > > > In SOLR-9310 we added more code that does some fingerprint caching in > SolrIndexSearcher. However, the synchronization looks like it could be made > more efficient and may have issues with correctness. > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/branch_6x/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/search/SolrIndexSearcher.java#L2371-L2385 > Some of the issues: > * Double checked locking needs use of volatile variables to ensure proper > memory semantics. > * sync on a ConcurrentHashMap is usually a code smell -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org