Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of simone.tripodi@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.82.171 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=BS4XFqDeo1TVqpGb29J4nUHABu0vCjwzE8ki6xnbOa+6qn9MuxYcpr4M4v3BvlENPO
         5Kv7BjaodSkeC+nywkBjDH+zj8FyXE5QE3wJ/1PdAVz9/u4ofout0akHt/R5Sgc4+Bg/
         8Zl55k7N9jiT8OUM3NF+AnN9RiR02eElrwxFY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinzt-HpZjc9dt_fsjexkSs9zscor-gg5j45d6EU@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20101013173240.809502388A1C@eris.apache.org>
	<AANLkTinzt-HpZjc9dt_fsjexkSs9zscor-gg5j45d6EU@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:51:16 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTimK-oTSuuaX-Pg1N8zvRNQRKWYMv=8QsC0BGFR7@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1022205 -
 /commons/proper/pool/trunk/src/java/org/apache/commons/pool/impl/GenericObjectPoolFactory.java
From: Simone Tripodi <simone.tripodi@gmail.com>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I agree. Maybe we don't need to make *Factory synchronized, but just pool i=
mpls.
How does it sound?
Simo

http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/


On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 8:45 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13 October 2010 18:32, =C2=A0<simonetripodi@apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: simonetripodi
>> Date: Wed Oct 13 17:32:37 2010
>> New Revision: 1022205
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=3D1022205&view=3Drev
>> Log:
>> fixed deprecated properties direct access
>> added missing setters
>> syncronized mutable properties (s|g)etters
>
> I think createPool also needs to be synchronised, as it references the
> various mutable fields.
> Alternatively, could make them all volatile.
>
> Otherwise if one thread sets the value and another calls createPool,
> the second thread might not see the latest value.
>
> But perhaps the PoolFactory class does not need to be thread-safe at
> all, in which case the synch. can be dropped?
>
> At present it appears to be thread-safe, but it is only conditionally
> thread-safe.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org