This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 42880 - Deadlock after opening a project
Summary: Deadlock after opening a project
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: editor
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Refactoring (show other bugs)
Version: 4.x
Hardware: PC Windows 3.1/NT
: P1 blocker (vote)
Assignee: issues@java
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on: 42877
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2004-05-06 10:30 UTC by Jan Chalupa
Modified: 2007-04-03 18:02 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
Thread dump (16.30 KB, text/plain)
2004-05-06 10:31 UTC, Jan Chalupa 		Details
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 Jan Chalupa 2004-05-06 10:30:25 UTC 
[refactoring build 040505; JDK 1.4.2_04]

I had one project open, and tried to open another
one (created using a trunk build a couple days
ago). The project node appeared in the Projects
View and the 'Applying Paths' progress bar
appeared. However, no progress was shown and the
IDE deadlocked (thread-dump attached).
Comment 1 Jan Chalupa 2004-05-06 10:31:03 UTC 
Created attachment 14739 [details]
Thread dump
Comment 2 Jan Becicka 2004-05-06 11:09:51 UTC 
I suppose you did this after you had unsuccessfuly deleted a file
(issue 42877). It looks like transaction did not finish after
unsuccessful delete.
Comment 3 Martin Matula 2004-05-06 12:15:33 UTC 
If that would be the case, then it would mean that there is a code
somewhere that starts the transaction but does not end it in finally
clause.
Comment 4 Jan Chalupa 2004-05-06 12:23:33 UTC 
Re Jan Becicka: Quite possible. I'll try to reproduce one or the other.
Comment 5 Jan Becicka 2004-05-11 13:33:55 UTC 
Already fixed in ExclusiveMutex.
Transaction was not ended correctly due to Exception thrown due to 42877.
Transaction is now ended in finally clause.
Comment 6 Jan Chalupa 2004-05-12 17:03:32 UTC 
Verified (as part of issue #42877).