[rules-users] Possible "memory leak" in 5.3 with update?

[Mark Proctor]

fh = wm.insert( new MyObject( 1 ) );
if you do
wm.update( fh, new MyObject( 2 );

The engine should not keep any references to instance MyObject( 1 )

Mark
On 02/04/2012 17:01, thenim wrote:
> @laune, not sure how the map relates to the problem I stated. In a map, the
> put operation will replace the *value* that is mapped to by that key (from
> my understanding). The map should not hold any further references to that
> value(?)
>
> The problem here isn't that, it's that the object reference is held on to
> somewhere in the internals of the working memory even though the fact handle
> is associated with a new object reference (I'm out of my depth here, but I'm
> guessing this is what is causing the "leak"). The problem goes away, if I
> update the same object (infact I find that my performance is significantly
> better, so this is what I do now.)
>
> I guess the references will be held till the session is disposed - which for
> me doesn't happen as it's a long running sessions. Anyway, it's interesting
> because I thought the rules engine only held weak references to objects...
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Possible-memory-leak-in-5-3-with-update-tp3874271p3878120.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users