ayushtkn commented on code in PR #300:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tez/pull/300#discussion_r1382298623
##########
tez-common/src/main/java/org/apache/tez/common/AsyncDispatcher.java:
##########
@@ -364,10 +369,20 @@ public void handle(Event event) {
}
try {
eventQueue.put(event);
+ if (LOG.isTraceEnabled()) {
+ LOG.trace("AsyncDispatcher put event: {}", event);
+ }
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
if (!stopped) {
- LOG.warn("AsyncDispatcher thread interrupted", e);
+ LOG.warn("AsyncDispatcher thread interrupted (while putting event):
{}", event, e);
}
+ // this is needed because in serviceStop we're looping to drain the
rest of the events and checking !drained
+ // in that case, an interruption here would lead to an empty queue
with drained=false, leading to
+ // a useless loop with a timeout (this can even cause unit test
timeouts)
+ drained = eventQueue.isEmpty();
+ LOG.info(
+ "Setting drained to {} due to interruption while putting a new
event, stopped: {}, blockNewEvents: {}",
+ drained, stopped, blockNewEvents);
Review Comment:
I tried to look out for reasons for separate boolean, but didn't find
anything reasonable, maybe the coding style then...
--
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: issues-unsubscr...@tez.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
