On 9/8/2011 8:45 AM, Jonathan Levinson wrote:
The reason we share a FopFactory instance between threads is speed. FopFactory
creation is very expensive. I believe it involves font look ups.
Perhaps we should go the private branch approach, just applying to FOP 1.0, the
fixes to the thread-safety issue. Thanks for the beginnings of such a list,
but would you mind sharing the complete list, or instructing me on how I can
construct a complete list?
Best Regards,
Jonathan Levinson
-----Original Message-----
From: Alexios Giotis [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 5:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Memory leak in FOP
Hi Jonathan,
We are running FOP multi-threaded in many production systems. Each system is
creating thousand documents per day (typically 100 -500 thousand PDFs) and I
have not noticed any memory leak. Having said that, our servers are running
with large memory heaps (6-10GB), FOP uses a lot of memory for large
documents and internal caches for performance.
If you are going to use it at production, I would recommend not to share the
same FopFactory instance between threads. It is supposed to the thread-safe
but we found (and in most cases fixed in trunk) several issues. You could try
the
FOP trunk or you could apply the patches for the related issues in your own
private branch (this is what we do). Some issues that I remember:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50698 (starting from
http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=129646673801270&w=2)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46360
and lately a deadlock that I am waiting for someone to review the patch:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46962
Best Regards,
Alexis Giotis
On Sep 7, 2011, at 7:31 PM, Jonathan Levinson wrote:
To speed up FOP rendering, I have developed a multi-threaded program that
initializes a FOP factory and shares it amongst the thread instances.
We experience a large performance increase because we are not starting a
JVM on each instance of FOP rendering and we are not creating a FOPFactory
for each thread but sharing a FOPFactory amongst threads.
Testing on LINUX and using the following command to examine memory:
ps -e -orss=,args= | sort -b -k1,1n | pr -TW$COLUMNS
I notice a slow memory memory leak.
The test sends the same xml and xsl over and over again to the same multi-
threaded program with its FOP factory instance.
Is this a well known problem in FOP? Does FOP leak memory?
Best Regards,
Jonathan Levinson
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
Hi, Jonathan-
It may be worth considering synchronizing the use of the FopFactory
instance.
-Terence Bandoian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
