> On Dec. 16, 2016, 7:05 p.m., Vadim Spector wrote: > > It is probably ok, but ... > > a) Did you investigate why service stayed alive? Perhaps, some knowledge > > about the implementation and its defficiencies to be gained there. Some > > unaccounted runaway threads? Or are we unable to termonaie some threads? > > b) System.exit() means that Sentry service better be the only thing running > > in JVM. Which I presume is the case now. Are we ok with making that a > > requirement from now on?
For a) please see SENTRY-1526. The service stayed alive because of the deadlock. b) I don't understand the question - what else can run in this JVM? This is a Sentry Server that we are trying to kill. - Alexander ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54808/#review159478 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Dec. 16, 2016, 7:23 a.m., Alexander Kolbasov wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/54808/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 16, 2016, 7:23 a.m.) > > > Review request for sentry, Hao Hao, kalyan kumar kalvagadda, Vamsee > Yarlagadda, and Vadim Spector. > > > Repository: sentry > > > Description > ------- > > SENTRY-1526 Sentry processed stays alive after being killed > > > Diffs > ----- > > > sentry-service/sentry-service-server/src/main/java/org/apache/sentry/service/thrift/SentryService.java > 578364933a3cdcf6c142b836360a83d322fe5c11 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54808/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Now process successfully dies after hitting ^C. > > > Thanks, > > Alexander Kolbasov > >
