yes, that is correct. When I ran DOTS tests, I noticed that increasing heap size just increased the time when Network Server JVM ran out of memory (for example: from 2 days to 5 days). So actual solution would be fix memory leak.

--
Ramandeep Kaur
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
On 1/30/06, John Embretsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Saturday, January 28, 2006, 1:11:31 AM CET, Ramandeep Kaur wrote:

> Hi,
>  
>  As per Stan's mail about prepared statements, I checked the source
> code for DOTS test case that John ran (ATCJ2.java) tosee if prepared
> statements are getting closed properly. I found that thereare
> fewmethods in  ATCJ2.javawhere prepared statements are not getting closed.
>
>  The following methods have prepared statements:-
>  doBid()
>  doPut()
>  doUpdateItem()
>  
>  The following should be added to the catch blocks of above methods.
>   pstmt.close();
> pstmt = null;
>  
>
> With the above, in case there is any exception, the prepared
> statements will get closed properly.
>
>
>  In addition, in doBid() method,
> pstmt.close(); and pstmt = null; should be added right after the following block.
>  
>  pstmt = conn.prepareStatement(updateBidItemSQL + "'" + itemID + "'");
>  pstmt.setFloat (1,bidPrice);
> pstmt.setInt(2,bidCount++);
> updateCount = pstmt.executeUpdate();
> DotsConfig.UPDATECOUNT++;
>
>  Now with patch DERBY-210, there may not be any need to modify DOTS
> code as all garbage collection will be taken care, but in case you
> still see problems even after applying patch DERBY-210, you might want
> to give a try to modify the  ATCJ2.java.

Thanks for pointing this out. I will do some DOTS testing using the
current trunk and the patch for DERBY-210.

I doubt _all_ garbage collection will be taken care of with the patch
for DERBY-210 (although I'm sure it helps a lot), but we just have to
wait and see how it goes... I will start experimenting with the DOTS
source code later, including your suggested changes, if the DERBY-210
patch does not resolve the issue.

>  Also, please increase heap size while running Network Server as well.

Sure, but there are limits to how much a Derby user is able to increase
the heap size. Currently (with Derby 10.1.2.1), it seems to me that it
is just a matter of time until the Network Server JVM runs out of
memory, when running the DOTS test(s).


Thanks,

--
John







Reply via email to