https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53606
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53606
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53606
Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53606
F.Arnoud frederic.arn...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
OS||All
---
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53606
--- Comment #2 from F.Arnoud frederic.arn...@gmail.com ---
I used this solution:
protected void sendPing() {
TcpFailureDetector tcpFailureDetector = failureDetector!=null ?
failureDetector.get() : null;
if
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53606
--- Comment #3 from Sebb s...@apache.org ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I used this solution:
protected void sendPing() {
TcpFailureDetector tcpFailureDetector = failureDetector!=null ?
failureDetector.get() : null;
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53606
--- Comment #4 from F.Arnoud frederic.arn...@gmail.com ---
You're right, only one access to get() for WeakReference (and brother classes).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
