mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Emmanuel Lecharny (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DIRMINA-845) ProtocolEncoderOutputImpl isn't thread-safe
Date Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:30:10 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-845?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13072932#comment-13072932
] 

Emmanuel Lecharny commented on DIRMINA-845:
-------------------------------------------

Still puzzled...

If the chunks are written in the CLQ in the right order, there is no reason for those chunks
to be send in another order, as the queue is read sequentially in the flush() method. 

The only reason you might send those message in the wrong order is that they are read from
the queue by two different threads, which should not be the case...

Am I missing something ?

> ProtocolEncoderOutputImpl isn't thread-safe
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DIRMINA-845
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-845
>             Project: MINA
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Filter
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.4
>            Reporter: Ilya Ivanov
>
> ProtocolEncoderOutputImpl uses ConcurrentLinkedQueue and at first look it seems to be
thread-safe. But really concurrent execution of flush method isn't thread-safe (and write-mergeAll
also).
> E.g. in RTMP several channels multiplexed in single connection. According protocol specification
it's possible to write to different channels concurrently. But it doesn't work with MINA.
> I've synchronized channel writing, but it doesn't prevent concurrent run of flushing
(in 2.0.4 it's done directly in ProtocolCodecFilter.filterWrite, but ProtocolEncoderOutputImpl.flush
has the same problem).
> Here the fragment of flushing code:
> while (!bufferQueue.isEmpty()) {
>   Object encodedMessage = bufferQueue.poll();
>                 
>   if (encodedMessage == null) {
>     break;
>   }
>   // Flush only when the buffer has remaining.
>   if (!(encodedMessage instanceof IoBuffer) || ((IoBuffer) encodedMessage).hasRemaining())
{
>     SocketAddress destination = writeRequest.getDestination();
>     WriteRequest encodedWriteRequest = new EncodedWriteRequest(encodedMessage, null,
destination); 
>     nextFilter.filterWrite(session, encodedWriteRequest);
>   }
> } 
> Suppose original packets sequence is A, B, ...
> Concurrent run of flushing may proceed as following:
> thread-1: Object encodedMessage = bufferQueue.poll(); // gets A packet
> thread-2: Object encodedMessage = bufferQueue.poll(); // gets B packet
> ...
> thread-2: nextFilter.filterWrite(...); // writes B packet
> thread-1: nextFilter.filterWrite(...); // writes A packet
> so, resulting sequence will B, A
> It's quite confusing result especially when documentation doesn't contain any explanation
about such behavior.

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

        

Mime
View raw message