river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Firmstone <j...@zeus.net.au>
Subject Re: Bug fixing
Date Tue, 19 Oct 2010 23:11:57 GMT
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> On 10/15/2010 10:51 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> I seem to have reached a level of understanding of River that lets me
>> track down some bugs, and bug fixing is an obviously useful activity, so
>> I plan to spend some time on it.
>> As I mentioned in the "Request for testing help" thread, I've
>> investigated the GetStateTest hang. The test is spinning waiting for the
>> TransactionManager's getState method to throw an exception because it
>> has discarded the aborted transaction. As far as I can tell, there is no
>> requirement that a TransactionManager discard a transaction, even when
>> it is permitted to do so.
>> I plan to file a Jira for the test, and modify it to spin for a limited
>> time. Treat either UnknownTransactionException or continuous return of
>> ABORTED status for e.g. one minute as successful test completion.
> I've investigated this some more, and the test is revealing a real 
> problem in the transaction abort implementation.
> If there is a timeout it passes the problem to a SettlerTask, subclass 
> of RetryTask, which retries the abort. However, 
> com.sun.jini.mahalo.TxnManagerImpl's abort code checks for an attempt 
> to abort a transaction for which abort has already been called, and 
> throws new CannotAbortException("Transaction previously aborted")
> The net.jini.core.transaction.server.TransactionManager interface, 
> which it implements, specifies that abort throws CannotAbortException 
> for a transaction that has reached the COMMITTED state, but says 
> nothing about throwing it for a transaction that is in the ABORTED state.
> I propose modifying TxnManagerImpl to make it match the interface 
> declaration, and allow an abort to be retried. This may break other 
> tests, if they are assuming the behavior that TxnManagerImpl implemented.
> Patricia
+1 Peter.

View raw message