Avoid concurrency issues with dictionaries #1450
Merged
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
Background processes can trigger conccurent modifications of collections being queried or enumerated, which can lead to corruptions and exceptions or runaway CPU. Use `ConcurrentDictionary<,>` instead to prevent these issues. Also: - Add explicit string comparer for comparing resource names. - Use consistent name for these collections. - Add some debug assertions as validation of incoming data. Future work might pull this pattern out into a new class, potentially also using a lighter collection than `ConcurrentDictionary<,>`. I'll wait until the current client/server refactoring is complete before doing that.
drewnoakes
force-pushed
the
fix-concurrency
branch
from
81687de
to
39aa68e
Compare
JamesNK
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2023
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #1239
Background processes can trigger concurrent modifications of collections being queried or enumerated, which can lead to corruptions and exceptions or runaway CPU.
Use
ConcurrentDictionary<,>instead to prevent these issues.Also:
Future work might pull this pattern out into a new class, potentially also using a lighter collection than
ConcurrentDictionary<,>. I'll wait until the current client/server refactoring is complete before doing that.Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow