It was buggy (didn't work) and was never actually used.
Why never actually used: for it to be used executeWithLock has to be called
with different requesters on the same lockId. That never happend in the code.
How it was buggy: Logically, the queue is deleted on release of the lock (meaning it was
meaningless the only time it mattered - when the lock isn't taken). In
addition, a different bug meant that having items in the queue prevented the
lock from being released forcing all other tasks to have to wait for lock
timeout even if the task that acquired the lock is long done.
Alternative: fix the queue. This would mean we don't want to delete the lock on release (since we want to keep the queue). Instead, we resave the same lock with expiration date being START_OF_TIME. In addition - we need to fix the .equals used to determine if the lock the same as the acquired lock - instead use some isSame function that ignores the queue.
Note: the queue is dangerous! An item (calling class / action) in the first place of a queue means no other calling class can get that lock. Everything is waiting for the first calling class to be re-run - but that might take a long time (depending on that action's rerun policy) and even might never happen (if for some reason that action decided it was no longer needed without acquiring the lock) - causing all other actions to stall forever!
-------------
Created by MOE: https://github.com/google/moe
MOE_MIGRATED_REVID=163705463
Memcache is already off but now it's not in the code anymore.
This includes removing domain creation failfast, since that is actually
slower now than just running the flow - all you gain is a non-transactional
read over a transactional read, but the cost is that you always pay that
read, which is going to drive up latency.
-------------
Created by MOE: https://github.com/google/moe
MOE_MIGRATED_REVID=158183506
Changed [] to use v1 instead of v1beta1, and replaced v1beta1 with v1 in all the java files.
If there is special build rules for open-source etc. that also need to be updated, or non "TAP-able" tests that need to be run, please check and see if they are OK.
-------------
Created by MOE: https://github.com/google/moe
MOE_MIGRATED_REVID=157895888
I'm working on some changes to XsrfTokenManager (b/35388772) and ServerSecret
was crufty enough that I ended up rewriting it. Now it uses a LoadingCache
with a transaction instead of needlessly race-condition-y static init logic.
It also now supports retrieving its value as either a UUID (the old format
used by XsrfTokenManager) or a byte[]. The latter is more flexible and can
be directly used with HMAC which the new XsrfTokenManager format will employ.
And lastly, I added tests. In addition, I tested this code on alpha and
verified appropriate operation (XSRF tokens still work from the console and
from regtool; if you remove ServerSecret from datastore and memcache, it
persists a new one).
-------------
Created by MOE: https://github.com/google/moe
MOE_MIGRATED_REVID=148931620
*** Original change description ***
Remove deprecated methods with Guava 20 release
***
-------------
Created by MOE: https://github.com/google/moe
MOE_MIGRATED_REVID=137945126
The dark lord Gosling designed the Java package naming system so that
ownership flows from the DNS system. Since we own the domain name
registry.google, it seems only appropriate that we should use
google.registry as our package name.
This change renames directories in preparation for the great package
rename. The repository is now in a broken state because the code
itself hasn't been updated. However this should ensure that git
correctly preserves history for each file.
