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

[thenim]

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-tp3874271p3874271.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.