[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-790?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14711124#comment-14711124
]
stephen mallette commented on TINKERPOP3-790:
---------------------------------------------
I had expected that some {{TraversalStrategy}} would implement
{{AutoCloseable}} as needed and those that did would have {{close()}} called -
basically a lightweight version of the full hierarchy concept {[~mhfrantz]
mentioned. I hadn't come across a spot yet where a {{GraphTraversal}} needs to
"close". Seems like it wouldn't be bad for the {{GraphTraversalSource}} to
just spawn independent {{Traversal}} objects. That doesn't seem too confusing
to me, but now that it's been mentioned, it might not be a bad idea to consider
if we can think of a use case where it would matter.
> Implement AutoCloseable on TraversalSource
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP3-790
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-790
> Project: TinkerPop 3
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: process
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0-incubating
> Reporter: stephen mallette
> Assignee: Marko A. Rodriguez
> Fix For: 3.1.0-incubating
>
>
> A {{TraversalSource}} may have resources to release so having a {{close}}
> method would allows that release to occur. The specific case has to do with
> {{EventStrategy}} which registers a listener on {{Transaction}}. That
> listener should be removed when the user is done with the
> {{TraversalSource}}, but there is currently no way to clean that up. The
> calling of {{close}} should prevent future traversals from that
> {{TraversalSource}}.
> I suppose this also means that a {{TraversalStrategy}} will need to
> optionally implement {{AutoCloseable}} or some other marker interface to
> designate it as a strategy that needs to release resources.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
