ZOOKEEPER-4749: Respect zookeeper.request.timeout also for asynchronous api - #2168
Open
kezhuw wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
ZOOKEEPER-4749: Respect zookeeper.request.timeout also for asynchronous api#2168kezhuw wants to merge 1 commit into
kezhuw wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
kezhuw
commented
May 29, 2024
kezhuw
left a comment
kezhuw
left a comment
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After read ZOOKEEPER-2251. I think we were introducing a feature to solve/circumvent a not reproduced bug.
zookeeper.request.timeoutis somewhat similar toconnectTimeout.- The stack show that packet was not notified or finished.
I did not find matching git tag for that stack dump.
| packet.wait(); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if (r.getErr() == Code.REQUESTTIMEOUT.intValue()) { |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This does not guarantee Code.REQUESTTIMEOUT in returning as sendThread.cleanAndNotifyState() will reset r.err to Code.CONNECTIONLOSS. The old testing code is cheating us as it modified client side behavior.
…us api
Currently, `zookeeper.request.timeout` is only respected in synchronous
api. I think there are should be no much differences between following two.
```java
String createdPath = zk.create("/path", data, Ids.OPEN_ACL_UNSAFE, CreateMode.PERSISTENT);
```
```java
CompletableFuture<String> future = new CompletableFuture<>();
zk.create("/path", data, Ids.OPEN_ACL_UNSAFE, CreateMode.PERSISTENT, (rc, path, ctx, name) -> {
if (rc == 0) {
future.complete(name);
} else {
future.completeExceptionally(KeeperException.create(KeeperException.Code.get(rc), path));
}
}, null);
String createdPath = future.join();
```
After this pr, we are able to unify synchronous api through calls to
asynchronous api as [review comments][review-comments] pointed out if we
feel there are too much identical code between synchronous and asynchronous
api.
[review-comments]: apache#2068 (comment)
kezhuw
force-pushed
the
ZOOKEEPER-4749-request-timeout
branch
from
May 29, 2024 07:59
ce19b3f to
4b686ed
Compare
Member
|
We recently encountered this issue, too. Do we have any update to this PR? |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Currently,
zookeeper.request.timeoutis only respected in synchronous api. I think there are should be no much differences between following two.After this pr, we are able to unify synchronous api through calls to asynchronous api as review comments pointed out if we feel there are too much identical code between synchronous and asynchronous api.