[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Failover possible dead lock

[clebert.suconic@jboss.com]

"Tim Fox" wrote : I don't think this is a deadlock - deadlock implies a race for two exclusive locks: 

Well.. I know technical name wouldn't be dead lock...

But you will still be waiting forever on a writeLock, that will never occur. (you're dead anyway :-) )


I guess I could call Failover to notify the receive thread.. yes...  but I just don't think it would be a good solution. The way it works now, we only start failure detection after we close the valve. We can't close the valve if there is an invocation pending.

I would prefer using the Valve only on places where a server communication is needed.  On that case we don't have a problem as we will aways get an IOException or a CannotConnectException when the server dies.

A receive is only waiting on an internal buffer and I don't see any problems on letting it wait Callback to be re-established and feed the buffer again after failover.

I have talked to Ovidiu by IM, and he thinks it would make sense to use the Valve only on places where an IO to the server is being performed.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4008084#4008084

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4008084