Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.
Bug 149340 - TransactionalEditingDomainImpl.deactivate() does not release lock exceptions occur
Summary: TransactionalEditingDomainImpl.deactivate() does not release lock exceptions ...
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: EMF Services
Classification: Modeling
Component: Transaction (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified   Edit
Hardware: PC Linux
: P2 major
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Christian Damus CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-06-30 16:41 EDT by Christian Damus CLA
Modified: 2017-02-24 15:10 EST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Patch to add the try/finally structure (1.35 KB, patch)
2006-06-30 16:44 EDT, Christian Damus CLA 		wayne.beaton: iplog+
Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Christian Damus CLA 2006-06-30 16:41:54 EDT 
The post-commit phase of deactivation can throw run-time exceptions.  Although these are generally caused by programming errors and are unrecoverable, it is a fact of life that they will occur and be logged by the Eclipse platform.

When they do occur in post-commit, the TransactionalEditingDomainImpl.deactivate() method does not release the transaction's lock because this is not protected by a finally clause.  This will cause the lock to "dangle", owned forever by the last thread that had a transaction, and no other thread will ever be able to start a transaction for the duration of the Eclipse session.
Comment 1 Christian Damus CLA 2006-06-30 16:44:41 EDT 
Created attachment 45627 [details]
Patch to add the try/finally structure

Attached a patch that resolves the problem by putting a try block around the call to postCommit() and a finally around the lock release.
Comment 2 Christian Damus CLA 2006-07-14 13:39:18 EDT 
Fix is committed to the R1_0_maintenance branch.
Comment 3 Christian Damus CLA 2006-07-14 13:39:53 EDT 
Forgot to resolve the bug on that last comment ...
Comment 4 Nick Boldt CLA 2008-01-28 16:35:14 EST 
Move to verified as per bug 206558.