From dev-return-67843-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@activemq.apache.org  Mon Oct 29 16:31:12 2018
Return-Path: <dev-return-67843-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@activemq.apache.org>
X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io
Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 8E990180627
	for <archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io>; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 16:31:11 +0100 (CET)
Received: (qmail 20067 invoked by uid 500); 29 Oct 2018 15:31:10 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@activemq.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@activemq.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@activemq.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.activemq.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@activemq.apache.org
Received: (qmail 20047 invoked by uid 99); 29 Oct 2018 15:31:09 -0000
Received: from git1-us-west.apache.org (HELO git1-us-west.apache.org) (140.211.11.23)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:31:09 +0000
Received: by git1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at git1-us-west.apache.org, from userid 33)
	id BED21DFD6B; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:31:09 +0000 (UTC)
From: clebertsuconic <git@git.apache.org>
To: dev@activemq.apache.org
Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org
References: <git-pr-2396-activemq-artemis@git.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <git-pr-2396-activemq-artemis@git.apache.org>
Subject: [GitHub] activemq-artemis issue #2396: ARTEMIS-2149 Protecting message.sendBuffer fro...
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <20181029153109.BED21DFD6B@git1-us-west.apache.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:31:09 +0000 (UTC)

Github user clebertsuconic commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/2396
  
    about previously from 2.0.0 I can only think that we have made improvements that probably allowed more load. I ran the same test against 2.0.0 and it fails as well.
    
    Prior to 2.0.0 we would always copy the buffer during send and duplicate it. I tried to create a single buffer upon receiving and call saveToBuffer using the read-only-buffer.
    
    During the process I missed this race. Even though I tested it quite a lot.
    
    Regarding validBuffer, The application is single threaded upon receiving a message. We only need to validate it later during encode, which I added the synchronize. So i think it's ok?


---