db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kathey Marsden (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Resolved: (DERBY-4723) Using an instance lock to protect static shared data in EmbedPooledConnection
Date Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:01:57 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4723?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Kathey Marsden resolved DERBY-4723.
-----------------------------------

       Resolution: Fixed
    Fix Version/s: 10.6.2.3
                   10.5.3.2
         Assignee: Kristian Waagan  (was: Kathey Marsden)

> Using an instance lock to protect static shared data in EmbedPooledConnection
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-4723
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4723
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: JDBC
>    Affects Versions: 10.5.1.1
>            Reporter: Wendy Feng
>            Assignee: Kristian Waagan
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 10.5.3.2, 10.6.2.3, 10.7.1.1
>
>         Attachments: derby-4723-1a-remove_code.diff
>
>   Original Estimate: 10m
>  Remaining Estimate: 10m
>
> EmbedPooledConnection has the unsafe synchronization as follow.
>  
> private static int idCounter = 0;
> private synchronized int nextId()
>     {
>         return idCounter++;
>     }
> idCounter is a static shared data, and it is not proper to use a instance lock to protect
it, especially when two instance of the class are created.
> it would be more safer to write this instead:
> private static synchronized int nextId()
>     {
>         return idCounter++;
>     }

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Mime
View raw message