Well, I don't have an issue with memory leaks now, and it's been a while since I had some problem with it(but it was due to some references in a list not cleaned).. It maybe a 'cargo cult', but I don't think it is harmful,-apart from some overhead- so I just prefer to be on the safe side.
A little OT. If I recall correctly, the GC basically keeps a count of the references for each object in the JVM. Once the number of refereces is null, it cleans the object. But let's say we have a circular reference between two objects, and we clean any references to them. What would happen with those objects? Will they be cleaned? JL 2011/8/1 Dave Newton <davelnew...@gmail.com> > Unless you have proof an action's properties are causing a memory leak, it > sounds like "cargo cult" programming to me. Most cases if leaks like this > are caused by something else in the code keeping references. > > Have you profiled the app to see if what you want is really necessary? I'm > pretty skeptical. > > Dave > On Aug 1, 2011 3:49 AM, "JOSE L MARTINEZ-AVIAL" <jlm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, the interceptor should be the first one on the stack, so all data > > required in the result should have been already used. It's not a bad > idea, > I > > will work with that. > > > > With respect to the GC, back in 2002 when I started using Java the GC > didn't > > work quite well, and my team and I started clearing and setting to null > any > > reference that weren't used anymore to avoid issues with memory, and I've > > doing that since then. In fact, the few times I've had some issues with > > memory leaks, it was usually due to some variables fields not cleared. > > > > 2011/8/1 Maurizio Cucchiara <mcucchi...@apache.org> > > > >> Doing what you are looking for through an interceptor is quite > >> trivial: you should simply check (after the invocation.invoke() call) > >> if an action implements Destroyable IF and then call the destroy > >> method. > >> Anyway, I think that the garbage collector in this specific case is > >> able to do a good work, why don't you trust it? > >> > >> On 1 August 2011 08:44, JOSE L MARTINEZ-AVIAL <jlm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > Is there a way to destroy correctly an Action? I know that a instance > >> of > >> > an Action is created every time it is needed, and it is alive during > the > >> > processing of the request until the response is sent back to the user. > >> What > >> > I don't know is if the instance is 'destroyed' in some way, or Struts > >> just > >> > sets to null the references to it, and that's it. I'm used to > implement > a > >> > Destroyable interface in all my classes, which I use to clear any Map, > >> List, > >> > etc, and set to null any field in the object, in order to avoid memory > >> > leaks. I would like to do the same with the action. I know I could > >> implement > >> > an Interceptor to do that, but I don't know if this is already covered > in > >> > Struts. Any thoughts? > >> > > >> > TIA > >> > > >> > Jose Luis > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Maurizio Cucchiara > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@struts.apache.org > >> > >> >
