Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> I tried reproducing Noel issue a lot of times. I ran profilers and I ran
> postage with a lot of configurations but I have not found any leak.
> Imo the issue is invalid and closed as cannot reproduce until we get
> much more informations.
The memory leak is documented and consistent. The fact that you cannot
reproduce it is good, since perhaps it won't effect too many others, but
does not mean that it doesn't exist. The empirical data doesn't lie: every
day, there is ~2MB less memory available on the heap, which is consistent
with what I have been seeing since I first reported the problem.
> The fact that Noel's production server does not work with an updated
> JVM (1.4.2 09=>12) is already weird enough to be considered a special
> case where maybe the JVM has problems and not James itself.
So we only support JAMES for JVMs that are the latest? Have you looked at
the fixes between _09 and _12 to see if any are meaningful? I'll note that
running JDK 1.4.2_12 caused problems with thread deadlocks when profiling,
since I did actually try it (as well as JDK 1.5.0_06).
> This is not a question of a pathetic leak: this is a question of
> reproducible leak.
Reproducible: ~2MB per day, consistently, over a long period of time. It
explains why I have consistently been able to keep JAMES running for only 10
days at a time.
> now we don't even know if this bug exists at all. I already questioned
> the "confirmed" word used by Noel. Imho a bug is confirmed when I can
> reproduce it in a clear way, and memstat is not a index for this.
I'm sorry, but the empirical data is not subject to your dispute, and the
existence of the OutOfMemoryError exception is not subject to your personal
desires.
> So until Noel won't decide to use a real profiler (with per-instance
> allocation time tracking) and not hprof :-P
hprof shows is which allocation sites are instantiating objects that are not
being collected. And I'm trying to get real-world runs in production data,
and not toy tests in a controlled environment. Real-world testing may be
messy, but your tests do not exercise dnsjava at all, for example.
Now, there is really no question that JAMES 2.3.0 is better than 2.2.0, with
fewer bugs, so I'm fine to release.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
