Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[WFCORE-6141][WFCORE-6156][WFCORE-6157][WFCORE-6158] Server Stability Fixes #5311

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 12, 2022
Merged

[WFCORE-6141][WFCORE-6156][WFCORE-6157][WFCORE-6158] Server Stability Fixes #5311

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
b264875
[WFCORE-6156] Use ServiceContainer.awaitStability() instead of Stabil…
ropalka Dec 2, 2022
a9bb73d
[WFCORE-6157] Forbid interruption of operation thread awaiting contai…
ropalka Dec 7, 2022
a31e41f
[WFCORE-6158] Add information about what needs to be investigated
ropalka Dec 7, 2022
4240d1e
Revert "[WFCORE-6141] Fixing transient test failures" - it was fixed …
ropalka Dec 7, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions controller/src/main/java/org/jboss/as/controller/OperationContextImpl.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ private void ensureWriteLockForRuntime() {
ExecutionStatus origStatus = executionStatus;
try {
executionStatus = ExecutionStatus.AWAITING_STABILITY;
modelController.awaitContainerStability(timeout, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, false);
modelController.awaitContainerStability(timeout, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, false); // interruption forbidden - see WFCORE-6158
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess you wanted to use see WFCORE-6157, instead of seeing WFCORE-6158. We can correct it after merging, but could you confirm @ropalka ?

notifyModificationBegun();
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
if (resultAction != ResultAction.ROLLBACK) {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1219,7 +1219,7 @@ void releaseStepLocks(AbstractOperationContext.Step step) {
// is going to have to await the monitor uninterruptibly anyway before proceeding.
long timeout = getBlockingTimeout().getLocalBlockingTimeout();
try {
modelController.awaitContainerStability(timeout, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, false);
modelController.awaitContainerStability(timeout, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, false); // interruption forbidden - see WFCORE-6158
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// Cancelled in some way
interrupted = true;
Expand Down
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion controller/src/test/java/org/jboss/as/controller/OperationCancellationUnitTestCase.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,14 +66,15 @@
import org.jboss.msc.service.StopContext;
import org.junit.After;
import org.junit.Before;
import org.junit.Ignore;
import org.junit.Test;

/**
* Unit tests of {@link ModelControllerImpl}.
*
* @author Brian Stansberry (c) 2011 Red Hat Inc.
*/
@org.junit.Ignore
@Ignore("WFCORE-6158")
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @ropalka , would you mind adding a short description to WFCORE-6158? It is unclear your intention with this Jira, I'm going to merge this PR since I understand WFCORE-6158 is in place to just investigate whether this test case must be removed, but I'll leave the Jira unresolved until it is clear what you want to do with this case.

public class OperationCancellationUnitTestCase {

private static final Executor executor = Executors.newCachedThreadPool();
Expand Down