You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@commons.apache.org by "Sebb (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2011/03/11 15:58:59 UTC
[jira] Created: (NET-367) ntp.TimeStamp uses incorrect lazy
initialisation of static fields simpleFormatter and utcFormatter
ntp.TimeStamp uses incorrect lazy initialisation of static fields simpleFormatter and utcFormatter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: NET-367
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NET-367
Project: Commons Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Sebb
Findbugs reports that ntp.TimeStamp uses incorrect lazy initialisation of the static fields simpleFormatter and utcFormatter.
This is because the static fields are written and read without synchronisation. One proposed solution is to make the static fields volatile.
The fields are SoftReferences containing SimpleDateFormat instances. SimpleDateFormat (SDF) is not thread-safe, so when it is used, the code has to synchronize on the instance.
Are the SoftReferences necessary? Does it really matter if the field cannot be garbage-collected?
If not, an Init on Demand Holder (IODH) be safer, and would avoid creating the instance if it was not needed.
Also, is it necessary to use static fields to hold the SimpleDateFormat instances, given that this requires the synchronisation when using the methods toUTCString/toDateString?
The other mutable classes in the package are not thread-safe (mutable fields are not volatile or synch) so overall thread-safety for the package would not be compromised by using instance fields and removing the SDF synchronisation and SoftReference.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Resolved] (NET-367) ntp.TimeStamp uses incorrect lazy
initialisation of static fields simpleFormatter and utcFormatter
Posted by "Sebb (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NET-367?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Sebb resolved NET-367.
----------------------
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 3.0
Made SDF objects instance variables
> ntp.TimeStamp uses incorrect lazy initialisation of static fields simpleFormatter and utcFormatter
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: NET-367
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NET-367
> Project: Commons Net
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Sebb
> Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> Findbugs reports that ntp.TimeStamp uses incorrect lazy initialisation of the static fields simpleFormatter and utcFormatter.
> This is because the static fields are written and read without synchronisation. One proposed solution is to make the static fields volatile.
> The fields are SoftReferences containing SimpleDateFormat instances. SimpleDateFormat (SDF) is not thread-safe, so when it is used, the code has to synchronize on the instance.
> Are the SoftReferences necessary? Does it really matter if the field cannot be garbage-collected?
> If not, an Init on Demand Holder (IODH) be safer, and would avoid creating the instance if it was not needed.
> Also, is it necessary to use static fields to hold the SimpleDateFormat instances, given that this requires the synchronisation when using the methods toUTCString/toDateString?
> The other mutable classes in the package are not thread-safe (mutable fields are not volatile or synch) so overall thread-safety for the package would not be compromised by using instance fields and removing the SDF synchronisation and SoftReference.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira