Bug 343977 - Warn the user about a wrong sequence number in SaveManager#saveMasterTable
Summary: Warn the user about a wrong sequence number in SaveManager#saveMasterTable
Status: VERIFIED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Resources (show other bugs)
Version: 3.7   Edit
Hardware: PC Linux-GTK
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: 4.3 M6   Edit
Assignee: Szymon Ptaszkiewicz CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on: 149121
Blocks: 415014 427421 489109
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2011-04-27 10:57 EDT by Szymon Brandys CLA
Modified: 2016-03-07 07:38 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Szymon.Brandys: review+

Attachments
Patch v.0.1 (3.94 KB, patch)
2011-05-09 10:55 EDT, Szymon Ptaszkiewicz CLA 		no flags Details | Diff
Patch v.0.1 (rebased to git) (4.14 KB, patch)
2013-02-08 11:54 EST, Szymon Ptaszkiewicz CLA 		no flags Details | Diff
Show Obsolete (1) 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 Szymon Brandys CLA 2011-04-27 10:57:45 EDT 
It is a follow-up to Bug 149121. We had to revert part of the fix, i.e. changes to SaveManager#saveMasterTable which caused perf regression in JDT tests, see bug 343815. We should investigate how to handle the check without introducing the regression.
Comment 1 Szymon Brandys CLA 2011-05-09 05:47:02 EDT 
Szymon P. will be working on it during 3.8.
Comment 2 Szymon Ptaszkiewicz CLA 2011-05-09 10:55:40 EDT 
Created attachment 195080 [details]
Patch v.0.1

The part of the fix that was reverted prevents from creating corrupted workspaces. The regression occurred in a test where projects are being closed. Since in all known cases, corrupted workspaces were created after the full save was followed by a snapshot, we can assume that closing projects (i.e. performing PROJECT_SAVE) is not dangerous and does not affect the corruption scenario. Knowing that, we can perform the check before FULL_SAVE and SNAPSHOT only.
Comment 3 Szymon Brandys CLA 2011-06-28 10:23:24 EDT 
Szymon, could you check how the JDT perf test is affected now?
Comment 4 Szymon Ptaszkiewicz CLA 2011-07-01 11:07:51 EDT 
I've checked the test and I don't see significant regression with this patch.
Comment 5 Szymon Ptaszkiewicz CLA 2013-02-08 11:54:52 EST 
Created attachment 226789 [details]
Patch v.0.1 (rebased to git)

The same patch only rebased to git.
Comment 6 Szymon Brandys CLA 2013-02-13 06:51:08 EST 
The new patch does not show any regression in the JDT test (according to Szymon P.). However even if other tests are affected, there should be no visible regression in daily use. And having the fix is necessary to finally confirm that ObjectNotFoundException from Bug 149121 will never come back.
Comment 8 Szymon Ptaszkiewicz CLA 2013-08-21 04:19:48 EDT 
User verified that sanity check works. See bug 415014.