[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2137?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15319598#comment-15319598
]
Michael Han commented on ZOOKEEPER-2137:
----------------------------------------
bq. Good catch - apprently there isn't a synchronous sync API ??
I think so, there is no sync version of the "sync". Probably we should.
bq. perhaps we should just use synchronous setData
Good idea, will try.
bq. there's another place where sync is used, in testServerHasConfig
Ah, I missed this one. The (incorrect) usage of sync in testServerHasConfig
ever fails in my endurance tests, for some reasons.
> Make testPortChange() less flaky
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: ZOOKEEPER-2137
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2137
> Project: ZooKeeper
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Hongchao Deng
> Assignee: Michael Han
> Fix For: 3.5.2, 3.6.0
>
> Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-2137-cb.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2137.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2137.patch
>
>
> The cause of flaky failure of testPortChange() is a race in sync().
> I figured out it could take some time to fix sync(). Meanwhile, we can make
> testPortChange() less flaky by doing reconfig on the leader. We can change
> this back in the fix of ZOOKEEPER-2136.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
