Hello, Clebert!
I made 2 Pull requests (1.x/master).
I guess I've missed the release, but anyway next release will be more
stable and reliable.
Thanks
--
Denis
On 5/5/17 6:59 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
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?
