New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make checks for existence of ThreadLocal more robust #1136

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 2, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
1 participant
@arteam
Member

arteam commented Jun 2, 2017

We should try to load an actual value of a ThreadLocal, because in some environments (like WebLogic) a NoClassDefException won't be thrown during loading of JdkProvider.

We should also catch all possible errors, not only NoClassDefException to avoid a situation when the provider becomes a null reference.

Originally reported in #1129

Make checks for existence of ThreadLocal more robust
We should try to load an actual value of a ThreadLocal, because
in some environments (like WebLogic) a `NoClassDefException` won't
be thrown during loading of `JdkProvider`.

We should also catch all possible errors, not only `NoClassDefException`
to avoid a situation when the provider becomes a null reference.

@arteam arteam added this to the 3.1.5 milestone Jun 2, 2017

@arteam arteam merged commit 469600d into 3.1-maintenance Jun 2, 2017

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
Details

@arteam arteam deleted the more_robust_jdk_check branch Jun 2, 2017

arteam added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 2, 2017

Make checks for existence of ThreadLocal more robust (#1136)
We should try to load an actual value of a ThreadLocal, because
in some environments (like WebLogic) a `NoClassDefException` won't
be thrown during loading of `JdkProvider`.

We should also catch all possible errors, not only `NoClassDefException`
to avoid a situation when the provider becomes a null reference.

(cherry picked from commit 469600d)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment