[BUGFIX] Alerts: don't reuse payload after relabeling. #13735
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
Also clarify why these variables are being cleared. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>
Avoids possible false sharing between loops. Plausibly there is no problem in the current code, but it's easy enough to write it more safely. Signed-off-by: Bryan Boreham <bjboreham@gmail.com>
|
Thanks, |
Agreed in principle, but the order in which things happen depends on map iteration, which is randomised. |
beorn7
approved these changes
Mar 8, 2024
|
I see, maybe in this case, it's better to ensure deterministic ordering. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 #13720
This PR has two commits: the first fixes the bug and the second cleans up something that I first thought could cause the bug.
On closer inspection I think all the variables captured by closure are local to the loop, but I think it's best to rewrite it in a transparently safer fashion.
I removed a comment referring to a desired future optimisation, since it does not add clarity.
If performance here is a problem, this will be found via profiling.