activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rob Davies (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Resolved: (AMQ-1671) InactivityMonitor issue with regards to exceptions on a connection
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:10:43 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1671?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Rob Davies resolved AMQ-1671.
-----------------------------

    Fix Version/s: 5.1.0
       Resolution: Fixed

> InactivityMonitor issue with regards to exceptions on a connection
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: AMQ-1671
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1671
>             Project: ActiveMQ
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Broker, Connector, Transport
>    Affects Versions: 5.1.0, 5.2.0
>            Reporter: Kevin Yaussy
>            Assignee: Rob Davies
>             Fix For: 5.1.0
>
>         Attachments: InactivityMonitor.java
>
>
> I'm using the 4/16 5.2 SNAPSHOT code.
> I'm reporting a new issue here, but this may be related or same as: AMQ-1482, and AMQ-1582.
> The issue is that if there is an exception on a connection, such as the process goes
away (could be an AMQBroker going away or a client process), the InactivityMonitor is not
properly reporting this.  If maxInactivityDuration is set to 0, and the client process goes
away, the AMQBroker never cleans up anything for this client, and the client can never reconnect
(it will get InvalidClientID exceptions).  If maxInactivityDuration is non-zero, the connection
will eventually get cleaned up when the inactivity timer pops.
> The issue turns out to be this line of code in InactivityMonitor::onException
>         if (!failed.compareAndSet(false,true)) {
> This means that when the connection goes away, this call returns true, but the if statement
is negating that so the next two lines of code in onException are never executed at this time.
 Only later (if maxInactivityDuration is non-zero) will this check result in true, such that
the next two lines in onException are called.
> I think that this is just an issue in misinterpreting what AtomicBoolean will return
for the compareAndSet method?  Assuming this to be the case, I changed this line to take out
the "!".  Now everything works exactly as it should.
> I've attached the changed source.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message