[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15660?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17533634#comment-17533634
 ] 

Mark Robert Miller commented on SOLR-15660:
-------------------------------------------

There are actually lots of advantages and value that comes from policing your 
threads like this, though it is a much tougher game in Solr than Lucene, and it 
requires solving to 0 and then staying on top and depending on various other 
quality issues, it can easily end up in a situation where you slave over 
keeping your sink clean while the rest of the kitchen is a mess. It really 
depends on the number of issues that crop up, go unattended, and are difficult 
for people to solve.

I'm pretty sure I've responded on an issue regarding this once, and in this 
case, I'd make the same judgment, and it would likely be an improvement for 
most devs to drop back to that 10-second linger.

bq. Another puzzling thing is that the stack trace there appears to resolve to 
a log statement

The stack for something blocked on a synchronized method will point to the 
first line in the method. So the sync block is either deadlocked or waiting for 
something very slow that holds the lock I'd guess.

> Remove universal 10 second test thread leak linger.
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-15660
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15660
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Test
>          Components: Tests
>            Reporter: Mark Robert Miller
>            Assignee: Mark Robert Miller
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 9.0
>
>         Attachments: screenshot-1.png
>
>          Time Spent: 40m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@solr.apache.org

Reply via email to