Fix request != 0 checking in the scalar paths of merge() #3093
Conversation
This file contains 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
akarnokd
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 20, 2015
Fix request != 0 checking in the scalar paths of merge()
|
Is this urgent for release, or can it wait? |
|
Yes, this is severe enough, especially if one merges high throughput asynchronous sources before observing them on a scheduler. Synchronous merges or small amount of values won't trigger the There is another possible issue which affected the merge() version before. Due to the scalar optimization, it could reorder values from a source:
Apparently, users of |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Requested amount could reach zero between the first check and entering the synchronized block where it has to be re-read in order to verify the scalar emission can really happen at that point; the new
testMergeAsyncThenObserveOnLooptest failed withMissingBackpressureExceptionafter ~20 rounds on my i7 4770K.This might or might not relate to the canary failure; if combined with retry(), it could have failed over and over, but I'm not sure where the worker retention might have happened.