Unfortunately I already tried releaseCollection(.., true); and the results were the same. In my test scenarios there are no other references to the data outside the collection passed to releaseCollection. Beyond my test scenarios it would be possible to have multiple references in which case I would want the copies to be made and data maintained.
Is it possible that my object's lazy relationships are causing excessive graph traversal during the release? If this is the case I'm wondering if I can test that by changing that relationship information in the data management configuration file even though the relationships still exist in my DB without causing any other unintended consequences. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Vroom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Try calling releaseCollection(.., true); > > > > If you are releasing a collection which has an object which is still > referenced on that client, DMS makes a copy of the instance. This is so > that your collection does not have any managed objects after the release > call.... If you pass in the true as the second param it won't make > that copy but instead will clear the collection. I have wondered if we > need a way to release the reference but leave the collection > unchanged... let me know if you think that would help in this case. > > > > Jeff > > > > ________________________________ > > From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of foobone9 > Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 7:18 PM > To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [flexcoders] lcds / fds release collection problem > > > > I have a flex 2 application where you can open tabs (of canvases) that > display and edit managed data using lcds 2.5.1. The retrieved data is > somewhat encapsulated to the UI tab so when the tab is closed I want > to release the data to minimize the client memory footprint and data > management overhead. > > The data is retrieved using fill() so to release I use (my > DataService).releaseCollection(serviceArray). This synchronous call > blocks for a long time and greatly increases the memory footprint. > > As an example a service array with a length of 127 objects took 48 > seconds and actually increased 202,094 bytes just to release. > > The objects in the service array have several lazy associations; some > of which have been accessed; some of which have not (based on paging > from my DataGrid). Could there be a circular referencing problem? > > I am probably doing something obviously wrong but I can't figure it > out and would appreciate any advice. >
