[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2069?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14247349#comment-14247349
]
Hongchao Deng commented on ZOOKEEPER-2069:
------------------------------------------
1. I do agree to remove previous synchronized block is risky.
2. I think waiting on a blocking queue (which you suggested) is the right thing
in doTransport.
What about my old suggestions: add back those synchronized and exclude related
findbug rules.
The worst case is to I can provide the old semaphore solution :)
> Netty Support for ClientCnxnSocket
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: ZOOKEEPER-2069
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2069
> Project: ZooKeeper
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Hongchao Deng
> Assignee: Hongchao Deng
> Attachments: QA-run-nettyclient-for-test.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2069-v10-channel.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v11.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2069-v12.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v14.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2069-v15-jdk6.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v15-jdk6.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2069-v16.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v2.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v3.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2069-v4.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v5.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v6.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2069-v7.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v8.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v9.1.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2069-v9.2.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069-v9.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2069.patch,
> draft.patch
>
>
> Review Board: https://reviews.apache.org/r/27244/diff/#
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
