curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Blum <dragonsi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: PLEASE REVIEW - Major re-work of Watcher wrappers
Date Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:21:11 GMT
Can you describe the change then? Because kill session doesn't seem to now
ensure that ephemeral nodes bound the the killed session disappear in a
timely manner
On Feb 7, 2016 8:03 PM, "Jordan Zimmerman" <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>
wrote:

> Are we using a new zookeeper?
>
>
> In Curator 3.0 with “new” connection state handling which simulates a
> Session timeout. However, all tests are run twice. First with the old
> handling and then with the new.
>
> Or did something change with our implementation of KillSession.kill()?
>
>
> KillSession did change though. A change I made to ZK got added in 3.5 and
> we now use that.
>
> -Jordan
>
> On Feb 7, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Are we using a new zookeeper?  Or did something change with our
> implementation of KillSession.kill()?
>
> Or maybe there's a timing issue with Curator's ConnectionStateManager
> State change: LOST?  I don't understand how we could get a LOST event
> without the ephemeral node attached to that session having disappeared?
>
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>
>> I don’t know if anything changed in ZooKeeper itself. I know that the
>> connection states changed in Curator, but Curator now tests both the old
>> mode and the new mode and they both fail here.
>>
>> -JZ
>>
>> On Feb 7, 2016, at 1:06 AM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I need to analyze this a bit deeper, but what I'm seeing on the 3.0
>> branch is that the ephemeral node /test/me created in testKilledSession() really
>> isn't disappearing when it should.
>>
>> After the session loss and the reconnect, /test still shows 2 children
>> [foo, me] and /test/me still returns a node.
>>
>> Any idea why the timing here would have changed?
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CURATOR-302
>>>
>>> I need to trace through what's really going on under the hood rather
>>> than band-aid the test.  Should be able to in next couple of days.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Any update on this? I think you should create a Jira for it.
>>>>
>>>> -Jordan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 12:30 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> BTW, this test passes on master... so it's some kind of 3.0 vs. master
>>>> issue.  I think I'm going to just have to dump in a ton of log messages and
>>>> see what differs.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> OK - please create a new Issue in Jira for this.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Jordan
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 12:24 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW: this is broken on CURATOR-3.0 as well, so it appears to have been
>>>>> broken for a while.  Maybe I'll have to git bisect...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Okay, so I looked into this for a bit, and I hit kind of a wall.
 I
>>>>>> think there is a legit bug/race in TreeCache, and the following patch
>>>>>> *should* remedy:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git
>>>>>> a/curator-recipes/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/recipes/cache/TreeCache.java
>>>>>> b/curator-recipes/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/recipes/cache/TreeCache.java
>>>>>> index df4403c..a4a022b 100644
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> a/curator-recipes/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/recipes/cache/TreeCache.java
>>>>>> +++
>>>>>> b/curator-recipes/src/main/java/org/apache/curator/framework/recipes/cache/TreeCache.java
>>>>>> @@ -303,7 +303,6 @@ public class TreeCache implements Closeable
>>>>>>          void wasDeleted() throws Exception
>>>>>>          {
>>>>>>              ChildData oldChildData = childData.getAndSet(null);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>>  client.watches().remove(this).ofType(WatcherType.Any).locally().inBackground().forPath(path);
>>>>>>              ConcurrentMap<String, TreeNode> childMap =
>>>>>> children.getAndSet(null);
>>>>>>              if ( childMap != null )
>>>>>>              {
>>>>>> @@ -807,8 +806,16 @@ public class TreeCache implements Closeable
>>>>>>          case RECONNECTED:
>>>>>>              try
>>>>>>              {
>>>>>> +                outstandingOps.incrementAndGet();
>>>>>>                  root.wasReconnected();
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  publishEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.CONNECTION_RECONNECTED);
>>>>>> +                if ( outstandingOps.decrementAndGet() == 0 )
>>>>>> +                {
>>>>>> +                    if ( isInitialized.compareAndSet(false, true)
)
>>>>>> +                    {
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>  publishEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.INITIALIZED);
>>>>>> +                    }
>>>>>> +                }
>>>>>>              }
>>>>>>              catch ( Exception e )
>>>>>>              {
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That should guarantee that the initialized event gets deferred until
>>>>>> all outstanding refreshes finish.. but it's not.  Something seems
to have
>>>>>> changed under the hood in how background events are getting sent
to
>>>>>> TreeCache, and I don't really understand it yet.  And running the
debugger
>>>>>> seems to affect the timing, like something racy is going on. :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, that is kind of weird.  I'll take a look.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>>>>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, sorry. The last few lines of the test currently are:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.NODE_REMOVED, "/test/me",
"data".getBytes());
>>>>>>>> assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.INITIALIZED);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This fails. But, if I switch them it works:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.INITIALIZED);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.NODE_REMOVED, "/test/me",
"data".getBytes());
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 2:57 AM, Scott Blum <dragonsinth@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So you end up with 2 initialized events?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You mean this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>          assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.CONNECTION_RECONNECTED);
>>>>>>>> +        assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.INITIALIZED);
>>>>>>>>          assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.NODE_REMOVED, "/test/me",
>>>>>>>> "data".getBytes());
>>>>>>>>          assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.INITIALIZED);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Seems weird if there are two, but I can help look.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>>>>>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hey Scott,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In this branch, TestTreeCache.testKilledSession() is
failing at:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>         assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.NODE_REMOVED,
"/test/me",
>>>>>>>>> "data".getBytes());
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, if I change the two asserts to:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>         assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.INITIALIZED);
>>>>>>>>>         assertEvent(TreeCacheEvent.Type.NODE_REMOVED,
"/test/me",
>>>>>>>>> "data".getBytes());
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> it works. Does that make any sense?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Jordan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > On Feb 4, 2016, at 9:23 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <
>>>>>>>>> jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Devs,
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > In trying to fix the bad log message "Failed to
find watcher”
>>>>>>>>> (which turns out to be a ZK client issue), I realize
that the
>>>>>>>>> NamespaceWatcher and WatcherWrapper stuff could be improved.
I’m still
>>>>>>>>> working on getting all tests to pass but I’d appreciate
more sets of eyes
>>>>>>>>> on this change. Please review carefully if you can.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > https://github.com/apache/curator/pull/131
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > -Jordan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message