Violeta, On 10/27/16 7:28 AM, Violeta Georgieva wrote: > Hi, > > 2016-10-27 13:53 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org>: >> >> 2016-10-23 8:22 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva <miles...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Hi Remy, >>> >>> 2016-10-21 15:11 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat <r...@apache.org>: >>>> >>>> 2016-10-21 13:21 GMT+02:00 <violet...@apache.org>: >>>> >>>>> Author: violetagg >>>>> Date: Fri Oct 21 11:21:48 2016 >>>>> New Revision: 1765995 >>>>> >>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1765995&view=rev >>>>> Log: >>>>> Test case for a delayed registration of WriteListener. Test is > marked >>> as >>>>> @Ignore as it is failing with the current implementation. >>>>> >>>>> Although maybe not explicitly disallowed, I would assume you have > to go >>>> into non blocking mode right after startAsync in the container thread, >>> and >>>> it's not something asynchronous. Any other use probably doesn't make > much >>>> sense [even more after an upgrade]. The API lists the APIs that are >>>> asynchronous and thread safe due to async (basically, AsyncContext) > and >>>> this is not one of them. >>>> So I wouldn't fix this at the moment, especially if it adds > complexity. >>> >>> The Processor for the "Request" that sets the WriteListener is in the >>> waiting processors list. >>> Can we introduce additional check if the Processor is in the waiting >>> processors list then we can execute DISPATCH_EXECUTE. >>> >>> >>> We just had a post on a user list who is trying to do exactly what I was >> talking about: write operation going on, concurrently set > setWriteListener. >> As soon as async is allowed, people will do this, even if inadvertently >> [the scenario you describe would work however, but there's no way to >> guarantee it]. I remain convinced that setWriteListener is only allowed in >> a container thread and not be concurrent with any IO operations, maybe we >> should seek clarification from the EG though. > > Yes I agree. > I'll post a question in the EG mailing list for clarification.
If setWriteListener should be restricted to container threads, why would it be a part of the public API? -chris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
