[SPARK-13164][CORE] Replace deprecated synchronized buffer in core #11059
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Note that the explicit toSeq effectively takes a snapshot of the queue, whereas before the implicit conversion would allow elements to be added but since we only call toSeq in the test at the end this should be fine. |
|
Test build #50682 has finished for PR 11059 at commit
|
holdenk
changed the title
|
cc @srowen who expressed interest on the JIRA |
|
LGTM merged into master. |
|
Should scalastyle rule be added to ban use of mutable.SynchronizedBuffer ? |
|
sounds like a good rule |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Building with scala 2.11 results in the warning trait SynchronizedBuffer in package mutable is deprecated: Synchronization via traits is deprecated as it is inherently unreliable. Consider java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentLinkedQueue as an alternative. Investigation shows we are already using ConcurrentLinkedQueue in other locations so switch our uses of SynchronizedBuffer to ConcurrentLinkedQueue.