nastra commented on code in PR #6857:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/6857#discussion_r1111625015
##########
aws/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/aws/s3/signer/S3ObjectMapper.java:
##########
@@ -42,26 +43,24 @@
public class S3ObjectMapper {
- private static final JsonFactory FACTORY = new JsonFactory();
- private static final ObjectMapper MAPPER = new ObjectMapper(FACTORY);
- private static volatile boolean isInitialized = false;
+ private static final AtomicReference<ObjectMapper> REFERENCE = new
AtomicReference<>();
private S3ObjectMapper() {}
static ObjectMapper mapper() {
- if (!isInitialized) {
- synchronized (S3ObjectMapper.class) {
- if (!isInitialized) {
- MAPPER.setVisibility(PropertyAccessor.FIELD,
JsonAutoDetect.Visibility.ANY);
- MAPPER.configure(DeserializationFeature.FAIL_ON_UNKNOWN_PROPERTIES,
false);
-
MAPPER.setPropertyNamingStrategy(PropertyNamingStrategies.KebabCaseStrategy.INSTANCE);
- MAPPER.registerModule(initModule());
- isInitialized = true;
- }
- }
+ if (null == REFERENCE.get()) {
Review Comment:
> Curious is there some added advantage of atomicReference over double-check
locking, other than code cleanliness?
there's no obvious advantage being added, other than slightly less code and
the fact that you don't need to think about `volatile` variables (as
double-checked locking only works with `volatile`)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
