* for the field accesses in MapIteratorCache. This test *has* found other TSAN errors,
     * including in MapRetrievalCache, so I'm not sure why this one is different. I did at least
     * confirm that my change to MapIteratorCache fixes the TSAN error in the (larger) test it was
     * originally reported in.
     */
    for (Future<?> future : futures.build()) {
      future.get();

      throw new AssertionError(e);
    }

    if (referenceException == null) {
      if (targetException != null) {
        throw new AssertionError("Target threw exception when reference did not", targetException);
      }

      /*
       * Reference iterator returned a value, so we should expect the
       * same value from the target
       */

        throw failure;
      }

      if (snapshot.shutdownWhenStartupFinishes) {
        snapshot = new StateSnapshot(STOPPING);
        // We don't call listeners here because we already did that when we set the
        // shutdownWhenStartupFinishes flag.
        doStop();
      } else {
        snapshot = new StateSnapshot(RUNNING);
        enqueueRunningEvent();
      }
    } finally {

	p := Product6{
		Name: "unique_code",
		Item: &ProductItem2{},
	}
	_DB.Model(&Product6{}).Create(&p)

	if err := _DB.Unscoped().Delete(&p).Error; err != nil {
		t.Fatalf("unscoped did not propagate")
	}

    SUCCESS,

    /** The method returned false. */
    FAILURE,

    /** The method threw an InterruptedException. */
    INTERRUPT,

    /** The method did not return or throw anything. */
    HANG;

    @Override
    public String toString() {
      return CaseFormat.UPPER_UNDERSCORE.to(CaseFormat.UPPER_CAMEL, name());
    }
  }

    }

    void unpark() {
      // This is racy with removeWaiter. The consequence of the race is that we may spuriously call
      // unpark even though the thread has already removed itself from the list. But even if we did
      // use a CAS, that race would still exist (it would just be ever so slightly smaller).
      Thread w = thread;
      if (w != null) {
        thread = null;
        LockSupport.unpark(w);
      }
    }

    if ((a ^ b) < 0 | (a ^ naiveSum) >= 0) {
      // If a and b have different signs or a has the same sign as the result then there was no
      // overflow, return.
      return naiveSum;
    }
    // we did over/under flow, if the sign is negative we should return MAX otherwise MIN
    return Long.MAX_VALUE + ((naiveSum >>> (Long.SIZE - 1)) ^ 1);
  }

  /**

                        newSessId = response.getSessionId();

                        if (newSessId != curSessId) {
                            throw new SmbAuthException("Server did not reauthenticate after expiration");
                        }
                    } catch (SmbAuthException sae) {
                        throw sae;
                    } catch (SmbException e) {

    }

    void unpark() {
      // This is racy with removeWaiter. The consequence of the race is that we may spuriously call
      // unpark even though the thread has already removed itself from the list. But even if we did
      // use a CAS, that race would still exist (it would just be ever so slightly smaller).
      Thread w = thread;
      if (w != null) {
        thread = null;
        LockSupport.unpark(w);
      }
    }

          if (!(service instanceof NoOpService)) {
            logger.get().log(Level.FINE, "Started {0} in {1}.", new Object[] {service, stopwatch});
          }
        }
        // Queue our listeners

        // Did a service fail?
        if (to == FAILED) {
          enqueueFailedEvent(service);
        }

        if (states.count(RUNNING) == numberOfServices) {