[concurrency-interest] ReentrantLock bug?
nathan.reynolds at oracle.com
Fri Mar 20 11:12:41 EDT 2015
I have hit this ReentrantLock issue a lot in the past. Since I could
prove anything about ReentrantLock, I didn't bother filing the bug.
Sorry. My workaround was to switch over to synchronized. I now avoid
ReentrantLock. It would be nice to get this fixed.
On 3/19/2015 11:04 PM, Kirk Pepperdine wrote:
> I see app’s survive OOME because only the offending thread gets shot
> down. After the request that causes the OOME is shot down, the rest of
> the app works fine.. for some definition of fine.
> On Mar 19, 2015, at 9:52 PM, Dmitry Zaslavsky
> <dmitry.zaslavsky at gmail.com <mailto:dmitry.zaslavsky at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> I doubt it's one of those conditions.
>> I would expect the process to die but it's perfectly fine otherwise.
>> Due to this issue it looks like a deadlocked process
>> Sent from mobile device
>> On Mar 19, 2015, at 4:50 PM, Vladimir Sitnikov
>> <sitnikov.vladimir at gmail.com <mailto:sitnikov.vladimir at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> I typically observe 'invalid' state of ReentrantLock due to
>>> Can you try your application with extended stack size and/or check
>>> for SOE/OOM?
>>> Vladimir Sitnikov
>> Concurrency-interest mailing list
>> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
>> <mailto:Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu>
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest