Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve CustomizeConfiguration by avoiding repeatedly resolve file config #730

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 28, 2024

Conversation

JoeCqupt
Copy link
Contributor

  • If this pull request closes/resolves/fixes an existing issue, replace the issue number. Closes #.
  • Update the CHANGES log.

@@ -106,14 +108,18 @@ public synchronized void loadForConfiguration() {
* @throws IOException link {@link IOException}
* @throws SAXException link {@link SAXException}
*/
private List<Map<String, Object>> resolver() throws ParserConfigurationException, IOException, SAXException {
private synchronized List<Map<String, Object>> resolver() throws ParserConfigurationException, IOException, SAXException {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you planning to avoid this in parallel class loader? If so, you should use reentrancelock rather than synchronized

@wu-sheng wu-sheng added the enhancement New feature or request label Nov 27, 2024
@wu-sheng
Copy link
Member

Please follow the PR template to update the changes.md

@wu-sheng
Copy link
Member

Please follow the PR template to update the changes.md

Waiting for this.

@wu-sheng wu-sheng added this to the 9.4.0 milestone Nov 28, 2024
@wu-sheng wu-sheng changed the title avoid repeat resolve file config Improve CustomizeConfiguration by avoiding repeatedly resolve file config Nov 28, 2024
Copy link
Member

@wu-sheng wu-sheng left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@wu-sheng wu-sheng merged commit 2059fd4 into apache:main Nov 28, 2024
191 of 192 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants