Github user eribeiro commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/208#discussion_r108242052
--- Diff: src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/NettyServerCnxn.java ---
@@ -100,11 +101,15 @@ public void close() {
+ Long.toHexString(sessionId));
}
- synchronized (factory.ipMap) {
- Set<NettyServerCnxn> s =
- factory.ipMap.get(((InetSocketAddress)channel
- .getRemoteAddress()).getAddress());
- s.remove(this);
+ InetAddress address = ((InetSocketAddress)
channel.getRemoteAddress()).getAddress();
+ Set<NettyServerCnxn> s = factory.ipMap.get(address);
+ if (s != null) {
+ synchronized (s) {
--- End diff --
Yeah... in the context of this call I think it is not necessary to
synchronize here if -- as you said -- we use a synchronized set (**currently
it's not**). I would also change `ipMap` to be a `ConcurrentMap` but unsure if
it's worth the effort, tbh. :thinking: thoughts?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
