com.refinitiv.ema.access.OmmCommonImpl executor left dangling on shutdown

[ThoughtXperiment]

We use the OmmConsumer in our application. We have noticed that despite calling uninitialize the thread within its implementation is failing to shutdown.

Please can you change the implementation so that:

1. The thread is named so its easier to pinpoint issues.
2. The thread is set to daemon.
3. The thread is always shutdown when uninitialize is called.

[L-Karchevska]

@ThoughtXperiment Thank you for reaching out, we've created an internal Jira to investigate the issue.
Could you provide some additional information:

• the specific version of the API you are using
• how exactly does the issue with still running dispatching thread happens? what does your application do? a sample application that reproduces the issue would be most helpful.

[ThoughtXperiment]

We have the latest version from maven (3.9.2.0)

com.refinitiv.ema
ema
3.9.2.0

There is a logic problem in the uninitialize method. The executor is not always shutdown:

if (_activeConfig.userDispatch == OperationModel.API_DISPATCH)
            {
                if (_executor != null)
                {
                    _executor.shutdown();
                    _threadRunning = false;
                    .......
                }
            }
            else
            {
                _userLock.lock();
                // FIXME - you need to stop the executor here too!
                _threadRunning = false;
                _eventReceived = true;
                _selector.wakeup();
            .....

[L-Karchevska]

@ThoughtXperiment

Please note that the executor is only used in case the user chooses API_DISPATCH operation mode:
https://github.com/Refinitiv/Real-Time-SDK/blob/1b59c3352774710231409c38457ecdbcb7fb3966/Java/Ema/Core/src/main/java/com/refinitiv/ema/access/OmmBaseImpl.java#L378C4-L386C5

[L-Karchevska]

@ThoughtXperiment As per my previous comment, the uninitialize method shuts down the executor only in case OperationModel.API_DISPATCH operation model is used because executor is only used for this operation model, so there should be no issues with this code.
Closing this issue for now, please feel free to reopen it in case there are specific reproduction steps for this issue.