Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
On 6/14/2010 12:36 PM, Jeremy Manson wrote: Daniel, We're happy to contribute. Like you, we had a customer complaint, which is why this happened. And I see that you did this work against an earlier bug. I've made myself the RE for 6931561 and I've update the evaluation to indicate that I'm

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Jeremy Manson
Daniel, We're happy to contribute. Like you, we had a customer complaint, which is why this happened. My suspicion is that we don't have access to the VM/NSK test suite. Feel free to run the patch against it. Jeremy On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > On 6/14/2010 1

hg: jdk7/tl/corba: 6960831: fix CORBA build warnings

2010-06-14 Thread jonathan . gibbons
Changeset: 032585ad970d Author:jjg Date: 2010-06-14 11:28 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/corba/rev/032585ad970d 6960831: fix CORBA build warnings Reviewed-by: darcy ! src/share/classes/com/sun/corba/se/impl/orbutil/CorbaResourceUtil.java ! src/share/classes/com/sun/c

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
On 6/14/2010 11:30 AM, Jeremy Manson wrote: Daniel, The fix hasn't made it to OpenJDK6. We were planning on pushing it to OpenJDK6/7, but we haven't had time for it yet. If your fix is better (I haven't had a chance to look at it), then we'll happily drop ours in favor of yours. I will be

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Jeremy Manson
Daniel, The fix hasn't made it to OpenJDK6. We were planning on pushing it to OpenJDK6/7, but we haven't had time for it yet. If your fix is better (I haven't had a chance to look at it), then we'll happily drop ours in favor of yours. For testing: I hand tested it with the "create lots of anon

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Mandy Chung
Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: On 6/11/2010 2:09 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: The theory is that there shouldn't be too many Logger objects in a normal system and once they have been added, then this fix doesn't come into play. I would be surprised if a real system had more th

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
On 6/11/2010 4:41 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 14:46, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: Jeremy, I'm definitely interested in learning about your approach to this issue. Here's the patch against openjdk6 by Jeremy. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/WeakLogger-jeremyman

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
On 6/11/2010 2:39 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: : Either of those schemes would be fine, but not for this fix and not without a good reason to do so. The theory is that there shouldn't be too many Logger objects in a normal system and once they have been added, then this fix

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
On 6/11/2010 2:09 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: The theory is that there shouldn't be too many Logger objects in a normal system and once they have been added, then this fix doesn't come into play. I would be surprised if a real system had more than 100 Logger objects. FYI

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
On 6/11/2010 2:02 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: Eamonn McManus wrote: I think an alternative approach to the one here would be to use a global ReferenceQueue and a subclass of WeakReference that has a pointer back to the Logger or LogNode that contains this WeakReference. Then, in the cases where yo

Re: Code Review for WeakReference leak in the Logging API (6942989)

2010-06-14 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
Eamonn, Thanks for the review! I didn't know about ReferenceQueues so that's a very interesting idea. I guess I need to get out of the VM codebase a little more often... :-) Jumping ahead in the e-mail thread, Jeremy Manson from Google has offered the use of their fix for the problem. It looks l