Sorry, dumb question, they're already running...
Peter Firmstone wrote:
How can I get Hudson to run the qa tests?
They all pass on Solaris sparc, I'd like to see Linux x86 and Windows
test results if possible.
I'd like to mark this issue resolved if possible.
Some jtreg tests are failing on my machine due to expired keys, but
this is unrelated, same tests failed prior to changes.
Cheers,
Peter.
Hudson (JIRA) wrote:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-142?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13051625#comment-13051625
]
Hudson commented on RIVER-142:
------------------------------
Integrated in River-trunk #493 (See
[https://builds.apache.org/job/River-trunk/493/])
River-142 Slightly different to the original patch, this commit
fixes delayed garbage collection synchronization issues by processing
expired leases immediately, without locking the entire object table.
Lease has been changed to be responsible for expiry, notification
and processing (on the garbage collection thread), synchronized
internally. A Lease in the object table must now be replaced once it
expires and cannot be renewed, it is removed from the table after it
is marked expired, to prevent garbage collection of potentially
active leases. Internal classes have been separated from ObjectTable
and BasicExportTable to encapsulate or simplify synchronization and
locking. Target is now more faithful to Exporter.unexport's
documented behaviour and interrupts dispatched method calls when
force is true when possible.
I wasn't able to create a test to simulate the original failure
condition, to do so requires a large number of leases to be processed
(to create a time window to process garbage collection of leases
after releasing the table lock) and proper timing of dirty calls,
garbage collection and clean calls. The new code processes the lease
immediately and isn't subject to the time window.
concurrency problem in DGC lease expiration handling
----------------------------------------------------
Key: RIVER-142
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-142
Project: River
Issue Type: Bug
Components: net_jini_jeri
Affects Versions: jtsk_2.0
Reporter: Peter Jones
Assignee: Peter Firmstone
Priority: Minor
Attachments: River-142.patch
Bugtraq ID
[4848840|http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4848840]
In the server-side DGC implementation's thread that check's for
lease expirations
({{com.sun.jini.jeri.internal.runtime.ObjectTable.LeaseChecker.run}}),
it checks for them while synchronized on the overall lease table,
but it delays notifying the expired leases' individual registered
{{Targets}} about the expirations until after it has released the
lease table lock. This approach was taken from the JRMP
implementation, which is that way because of the fix for 4118056 (a
previous deadlock bug-- but now, I'm thinking that the JRMP
implementation has this bug too).
The problem seems to be that after releasing the lease table lock,
it is possible for another lease renewal/request to come in (from
the same DGC client and for the same remote object) that would then
be invalidated by the subsequent {{Target}} notification made by the
lease expiration check thread-- and thus the client's lease renewal
(for that remote object) will be forgotten. It would appear that
the synchronization approach here needs to be reconsidered.
h4. ( Comments note: )
In addition to the basic problem of the expired-then-renewed client
being removed from the referenced set, there is also the problem of
the sequence table entry being forgotten-- which prevents detection
of a "late clean call".
Normally, late clean calls are not a problem because sequence
numbers are retained while the client is in the referenced set (and
there is no such thing as a "strong dirty"). But in this case, with
the following order of events on the server side:
# dirty, seqNo=2
# (lease expiration)
# clean, seqNo=1
The primary bug here is that the first two events will leave the
client missing from the referenced set. But the secondary bug is
that even if that's fixed, with the sequence number forgotten, the
third event (the "late clean call") will still cause the client to
be removed from the referenced set.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
