Don't hold a lock over a continuation in Transaction #871
+30
−13
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Motivation: The various 'withMumbleContinuation' APIs are supposed to be invoked synchronously with the caller. This assumption allows a lock to be acquired before the call and released from the body of the 'withMumbleContinuation' after e.g. storing the continuation. However this isn't the case and the job may be re-enqueued on the executor meaning that this is pattern is vulnerable to deadlocks. Modifications: - Drop and reacquire the lock in Transaction Result: Lower chance of deadlock
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation:
The various 'withMumbleContinuation' APIs are supposed to be invoked synchronously with the caller. This assumption allows a lock to be acquired before the call and released from the body of the 'withMumbleContinuation' after e.g. storing the continuation. However this isn't the case and the job may be re-enqueued on the executor meaning that this is pattern is vulnerable to deadlocks.
Modifications:
Result:
Lower chance of deadlock