[jcifs] Re: jCIFS deadlock issue - when can we expect a fix?

[Michael B Allen]

How is this working for you Ronny?

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:15:35 -0500
Michael B Allen <mba2000 at ioplex.com> wrote:

> Yup. I'll add it to The List.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mike
> 
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:14:25 +0100
> Ronny Schuetz <usenet-01 at groombridge34.de> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Mike,
> > 
> > > No. I don't think so. All 75 threads should use the same socket to
> > > multiplex requests (unless the server periodically closes sockets). If
> > > you set ssnLimit to 25 then you should see ~3 sockets.
> > 
> > Thanks for the explanation. Thats helpful to know.
> > 
> > After some additional stability tests with 200 threads accessing a
> > single windows share and another stability test of our application it
> > looks like the deadlock issue is fixed now. In addition to the places
> > already communicated, I had to synchronize SmbTree#treeConnect() in the
> > same way:
> > 
> > void treeConnect(ServerMessageBlock andx,
> >                  ServerMessageBlock andxResponse ) throws SmbException
> > {
> >  synchronized(session.transport()._oSetupDisconnectMutex)
> >  {
> >   // ... add original message body here ...
> >  }
> > }
> > 
> > Maybe you can add this change (or a better one) to the next jCIFS
> > version. The performance does not seem to be impacted heavily.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Ronny
> > 
>