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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

SocketIO: Change isAlive to atomic update to solve the high concurrency problem #1165

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Sep 2, 2024
Merged

SocketIO: Change isAlive to atomic update to solve the high concurrency problem #1165

Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e7bb3aa
Change isAlive to atomic update to solve the high concurrency problem
liaohongxing Aug 26, 2024
dee94a9
Improve thread safety and state management
liaohongxing Aug 26, 2024
ee9911b
Merge branch 'main' into main
gaby Aug 26, 2024
27e4c8d
Improve thread safety
liaohongxing Aug 27, 2024
dadd0c8
Improve thread safety
liaohongxing Aug 27, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 5 additions & 4 deletions socketio/socketio.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -564,13 +564,14 @@ func (kws *Websocket) read(ctx context.Context) {

// When the connection closes, disconnected method
func (kws *Websocket) disconnected(err error) {
kws.fireEvent(EventDisconnect, nil, err)

// may be called multiple times from different go routines
if kws.IsAlive() {
close(kws.done)
kws.setAlive(false)
if !kws.IsAlive() {
close(kws.done)
}
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot Aug 27, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Improve readability and efficiency.

The check if !kws.IsAlive() is redundant after setting kws.setAlive(false). The close(kws.done) should be moved outside the if block for clarity.

Apply this diff to improve readability and efficiency:

- if !kws.IsAlive() {
-     close(kws.done)
- }
+ close(kws.done)
Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
if !kws.IsAlive() {
close(kws.done)
}
close(kws.done)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

setAlive then needs to check the status again, and isAlive may enter in parallel

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@liaohongxing, you're absolutely right. Rechecking the status after calling setAlive(false) is crucial to avoid race conditions, especially in a highly concurrent environment where isAlive might be accessed by other goroutines in parallel. The current implementation ensures that the done channel is only closed when the connection is confirmed to be inactive, which is the correct approach. Thanks for the clarification!

kws.fireEvent(EventDisconnect, nil, err)
}
kws.setAlive(false)

// Fire error event if the connection is
// disconnected by an error
Expand Down