Skip to content
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -249,16 +249,25 @@ public void processElement(ProcessContext context, @StateId("count") ValueState<
context.output(Objects.requireNonNull(context.element()).getValue());

CopyOption[] cpOptions = {StandardCopyOption.COPY_ATTRIBUTES};
CopyOption[] updOptions = {StandardCopyOption.REPLACE_EXISTING};
CopyOption[] updOptions = {
StandardCopyOption.REPLACE_EXISTING, StandardCopyOption.COPY_ATTRIBUTES
};
final Path sourcePath = Paths.get(sourcePathStr);
final Path watchPath = Paths.get(watchPathStr);

if (0 == current) {
Thread.sleep(100);
// Ensure overwrite updates get a distinct mtime even when COPY_ATTRIBUTES is enabled.
Files.setLastModifiedTime(
sourcePath.resolve("first"), FileTime.fromMillis(System.currentTimeMillis() + 2000));
Comment on lines +261 to +262
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

Using a future timestamp (System.currentTimeMillis() + 2000) is a workaround for filesystem resolution issues but can be fragile in environments that validate file timestamps. Consider if a more deterministic way to ensure increasing timestamps (e.g., using a base time and incrementing) would be more reliable.

Files.copy(sourcePath.resolve("first"), watchPath.resolve("first"), updOptions);
Files.copy(sourcePath.resolve("second"), watchPath.resolve("second"), cpOptions);
} else if (1 == current) {
Thread.sleep(100);
Files.setLastModifiedTime(
sourcePath.resolve("first"), FileTime.fromMillis(System.currentTimeMillis() + 4000));
Files.setLastModifiedTime(
sourcePath.resolve("second"), FileTime.fromMillis(System.currentTimeMillis() + 4000));
Comment on lines +267 to +270
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

Calling System.currentTimeMillis() multiple times for related updates can lead to inconsistent timestamps if the clock ticks between calls. It's better to capture the timestamp once. Also, the use of future offsets (e.g., + 4000) remains a potential source of flakiness on some platforms.

Suggested change
Files.setLastModifiedTime(
sourcePath.resolve("first"), FileTime.fromMillis(System.currentTimeMillis() + 4000));
Files.setLastModifiedTime(
sourcePath.resolve("second"), FileTime.fromMillis(System.currentTimeMillis() + 4000));
long now = System.currentTimeMillis();
Files.setLastModifiedTime(
sourcePath.resolve("first"), FileTime.fromMillis(now + 4000));
Files.setLastModifiedTime(
sourcePath.resolve("second"), FileTime.fromMillis(now + 4000));

Files.copy(sourcePath.resolve("first"), watchPath.resolve("first"), updOptions);
Files.copy(sourcePath.resolve("second"), watchPath.resolve("second"), updOptions);
Files.copy(sourcePath.resolve("third"), watchPath.resolve("third"), cpOptions);
Expand Down
Loading