ConcurrentModificationException in terracotta session scavenger

Those line numbers are slightly off (I was testing some local changes). This should match the 6.1.15 tagged sources

java.util.ConcurrentModificationException
at java.util.Hashtable$Enumerator.next(Hashtable.java:1031)
at java.util.Hashtable$EntriesIterator.nextEntry(Hashtable.java:955)
at java.util.Hashtable$EntriesIterator.next(Hashtable.java:943)
at org.mortbay.terracotta.servlet.TerracottaSessionManager.scavenge(TerracottaSessionManager.java:482)
at org.mortbay.terracotta.servlet.TerracottaSessionManager.run(TerracottaSessionManager.java:164)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:441)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRunAndReset(FutureTask.java:292)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:58)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$101(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:98)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.runPeriodic(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:181)
at java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:205)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:886)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:908)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:619)

Tim,

I fail to see how iterating over the keys makes any difference with respect to the ConcurrentModificationException, as we're adding/removing keys while iterating over them, unless this is a feature of the clustered Hashtable.
If you confirm this feature, then I can just modify the code in this way to make it work properly ?

synchronized (_sessions)
{
    synchronized (_sessionExpirations)
    {
        for (String sessionId : _sessionExpirations.keySet())
        {
            MutableLong value = _sessionExpirations.get(sessionId);
            if (value != null)
            {
                long expirationTime = value.value;
                Log.debug("Estimated expiration time {} for session {}", expirationTime, sessionId);
                if (expirationTime > 0 && expirationTime < now) candidates.add(sessionId);
            }
        }

        _sessions.keySet().retainAll(_sessionExpirations.keySet());
    }
}

Note that I am using keySet() and not keys() as you suggest; does this make any difference ?

Thanks !

The suggestion for using keys() instead of keySet() was deliberate. Enumeration (what keys() returns) does not throw ConcurrentModificationException like the iterator from keySet() can. I'm glad you added the null check after the get() since that can happen now.