You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@isis.apache.org by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> on 2014/09/26 09:42:32 UTC

Possible concurrency issue in ServiceInstantiator

Hi Dan,

I've added a comment to
https://github.com/apache/isis/commit/ad79a943c51473f81b33bc0f84b17fc2819d0ea6#diff-e6d4ba72d6d81e5f75653a968c739d17R176
but I'm not sure that will send a notification to dev@ or even personally
to you as the committer of the change.

I don't know what is the scope of ServiceInstantiator but the new caches
for @PostConstruct and @PreDestroy look to me as application/global scoped.
If this is the case then I think using a concurrent map would be better
than LinkedHashMap.


Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov

Re: Possible concurrency issue in ServiceInstantiator

Posted by Dan Haywood <da...@haywood-associates.co.uk>.

On 26 September 2014 08:42, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> I've added a comment to
>
> https://github.com/apache/isis/commit/ad79a943c51473f81b33bc0f84b17fc2819d0ea6#diff-e6d4ba72d6d81e5f75653a968c739d17R176
> but I'm not sure that will send a notification to dev@ or even personally
> to you as the committer of the change.
>
>
It came through to me personally, but not to dev.



> I don't know what is the scope of ServiceInstantiator but the new caches
> for @PostConstruct and @PreDestroy look to me as application/global scoped.
> If this is the case then I think using a concurrent map would be better
> than LinkedHashMap.
>
>
Agreed; ServiceInstantiator is a singleton, so that could be an issue.
Will make the change.

Thx for the catch!

Dan



>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
> https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov
>