I'm just running a personal errand and I should cut the release in 2 hours. I can wait a little longer but I don't want to pass today (everything fixed) ..
unless it's a big change.. On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Denis V. Kirpichenkov <[email protected]> wrote: > Justin, thank you, so I'm going to make a pull request with ThreadGroup > removal. > > -- > Denis > > > On 5/5/17 7:47 AM, Justin Bertram wrote: >> >> I'm actually not sure why ActiveMQThreadFactory needs a thread group at >> all. As long as the threads are named appropriately I think there doesn't >> need to be a group and that would solve this leak. Otherwise we'd have to >> figure out a way to call destroy() on the group when pool is shutdown and >> that isn't obvious. >> >> >> Justin >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Denis V. Kirpichenkov" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2017 12:48:43 PM >> Subject: ARTEMIS-874 ThreadGroup memory leak >> >> Hello, All! >> >> Recently I faced with a memleak described in >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-874. And my question is >> why does ActiveMQThreadFactory.defaultThreadFactory() create its own >> ThreadGroup? May be it is fine to work without it? >> > -- Clebert Suconic
