[jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-1990) suspicious instantiation of java Random instances

["Norbert Kalmar (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1990?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16578285#comment-16578285 ] 

Norbert Kalmar commented on ZOOKEEPER-1990:
-------------------------------------------

The options mentioned in this ticket (and basically these are the only options in the JDK):
- call Random() -> yes, since java 7, it uses this(seedUniquifier() ^ System.nanoTime()); - This should give randomly distributed  uncorrelated seeds even after subsequent initializations and across different threads.
- The currently used "new Random(System.currentTimeMillis() ^ this.hashCode());" - basically yields the same results as the Random() call (since java 7)
- ThreadLocalRandom - it has a Random instance per thread - so basically safeguards against multiple threads using the same Random instance, which we already making sure to use different instances. (Otherwise System.currentTimeMillis() ^ this.hashCode() would be useless as well). One downside is you cannot control the initial seed. But I don't think that's a problem.

In my opinion, I don't see these Random instantiations as suspicious, so I'm not sure why this is critical. We could change it to ThreadLocalRandom if needed, but I just don't see the advantages this would bring (other then it would be more "fail-safe" in terms of future refactor / modification - which might be a valid reason to still go with teh changes).

> suspicious instantiation of java Random instances
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1990
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1990
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 3.5.0
>            Reporter: Patrick Hunt
>            Assignee: Norbert Kalmar
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 3.6.0, 3.5.5
>
>
> It's not clear to me why we are doing this, but it looks very suspicious. Why aren't we just calling "new Random()" in these cases? (even for the tests I don't really see it - typically that would just be for repeatability)
> {noformat}
> ag "new Random[ \t]*\(" .
> src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/ClientCnxn.java
> 817:        private Random r = new Random(System.nanoTime());        
> src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/client/StaticHostProvider.java
> 75:       sourceOfRandomness = new Random(System.currentTimeMillis() ^ this.hashCode());
> 98:        sourceOfRandomness = new Random(randomnessSeed);
> src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/quorum/AuthFastLeaderElection.java
> 420:                rand = new Random(java.lang.Thread.currentThread().getId()
> src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/SyncRequestProcessor.java
> 64:    private final Random r = new Random(System.nanoTime());
> src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/ZooKeeperServer.java
> 537:        Random r = new Random(id ^ superSecret);
> 554:        Random r = new Random(sessionId ^ superSecret);
> src/java/test/org/apache/zookeeper/server/quorum/WatchLeakTest.java
> 271:        Random r = new Random(SESSION_ID ^ superSecret);
> src/java/test/org/apache/zookeeper/server/quorum/CommitProcessorTest.java
> 151:            Random rand = new Random(Thread.currentThread().getId());
> 258:            Random rand = new Random(Thread.currentThread().getId());
> 288:        Random rand = new Random(Thread.currentThread().getId());
> src/java/test/org/apache/zookeeper/test/StaticHostProviderTest.java
> 40:    private Random r = new Random(1);
> {noformat}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)