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

I'm using a stateful session (in a slightly odd way - obviously this is the problem), I have a stream of "messages" coming into my system and each message one of a set of unique keys. Now my rules test various attibutes of this message and makes some changes (to the messages) etc. (the rules aren't the problem here - infact in my test case, I have no rules). I tested the "normal" approach where each message is inserted and the fact handle retained, and subsequently after firing, the handle is removed (yes this sounds like a good case for Fusion, except for the making changes bit.) I noticed that I could get better throughput, if took the following approach: 1. On the first time the unique key is detected, the handle is saved 2. Then each time a message with that key is received, "update" is called with the handle for that key Now, the important thing here is that the "fact" is a *different* object not an updated version of the original associated with the handle. Now with this approach, I was getting better numbers, however every so often there would be a "pause", with GC details being printed out, I see immediately that it's sitting there doing full GC's very frequently, and switching to the concurrent collector, I can see mode failures regularly (i.e. full GCs). With a low message rate, I didn't notice it initially, but with higher message rates, this is a serious issue. It appears that the approach I've taken highlights a "leak". I wanted to find out if others have encountered this before digging around in the code, for the moment, I will "fix" my approach so that I update the "same object" - but is "update" not meant to be used this way? Thanks, Nim -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Possible-memory-leak-in-5-3-with-update... Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.