On Dec 26, 2013 12:27 PM, "Mike Drob" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm willing to stipulate that this solves the thread leak from web > containers - I haven't verified it, but I am ever hopeful. Does this > solution imply that we should nix the close() methods just added in the > snapshot branches? > >
If we can verify that it solves the leaks for web containers, I would say yes. We can do proper life cycle for persistent state when we provide an updated client API.
