[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mike Drob resolved LUCENE-9453.
-------------------------------
Fix Version/s: master (9.0)
Lucene Fields: (was: New)
Assignee: Mike Drob
Resolution: Fixed
Thanks for the feedback [~dweiss], [~simonw]. Added the assert and committed
this.
> DocumentWriterFlushControl missing explicit sync on write
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-9453
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9453
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Mike Drob
> Assignee: Mike Drob
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: master (9.0)
>
> Time Spent: 0.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> checkoutAndBlock is not synchronized, but has a non-atomic write to
> {{numPending}}. Meanwhile, all of the other writes to numPending are in sync
> methods.
> In this case it turns out to be ok because all of the code paths calling this
> method are already sync:
> {{synchronized doAfterDocument -> checkout -> checkoutAndBlock}}
> {{checkoutLargestNonPendingWriter -> synchronized(this) -> checkout ->
> checkoutAndBlock}}
> If we make {{synchronized checkoutAndBlock}} that protects us against future
> changes, shouldn't cause any performance impact since the code paths will
> already be going through a sync block, and will make an IntelliJ warning go
> away.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
