On Tue, 20 Jul 2010, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> After a little more investigation, it appears that
> core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.unlock() is being called before
> core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.endCopy(), in
> core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.processCopyResults() apparently because it receives
> a "Z", called by core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.writeToCopy(). Investigating
> further.
Okay, have investigated a little further. It seems that the server may be
responding to the client a little too quickly with the "all done" message.
Here is a sequence of events in core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl:
We call startCopy(). It calls processCopyResults().
In processCopyResults, we receive character G, and we lock.
We call writeToCopy(). It calls processCopyResults().
We receive character C.
We receive character Z, and unlock.
We call endCopy(), which tries to unlock and fails.
So, should the unlocking happen elsewhere, or should endCopy not require a
lock?
Matthew
--
Jadzia: Don't forget the 34th rule of acquisition: Peace is good for business.
Quark: That's the 35th.
Jadzia: Oh yes, that's right. What's the 34th again?
Quark: War is good for business. It's easy to get them mixed up.