Yep, that should do it, at least that's the part I tested a long running test in the coming week will show how good :-)
regards, Achim 2012/10/23 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: > OK, this [1] should do it. WDYT? Out with it? > > Kind regards, > Andreas > > [1] > https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.wicket/commit/a2a103355e6c480864dcf1bd748b197fe695b0db > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Bram Pouwelse <b...@pouwelse.com> wrote: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> The fix seems to work, the only concern I have is that this may cause >> exceptions in a case where a custom property is set on the application >> in the application factory. This property would not be set by Pax >> Wicket when the "enhanced" version of the application is created. But >> even without the fix this would cause some unexpected behaviour. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Kind regards, >> Bram >> >> >> 2012/10/23 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: >>> perfect! I just want to get a second feedback from Bram. If he also >>> confirms the trick working I'll commit and release PaxWicket 1.1.1 >>> tonight. >>> >>> Thank you very much for discovering and testing this one! >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Andreas >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi Guys, >>>> >>>> I changed it according to the idea of Bram, >>>> and tested it with my application that was consuming far to much >>>> memory (reproducable). >>>> It's now stable below 300 MB of Heap. >>>> >>>> @Bram thanks for pointing to this, this really safed my day :-D >>>> >>>> regards, Achim >>>> >>>> 2012/10/23 Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>: >>>>> Hi Andreas, >>>>> >>>>> I did change this locally and I'm testing it right now. >>>>> Will give feedback later ... >>>>> >>>>> regards, Achim >>>>> >>>>> 2012/10/23 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> Well, I can commit your proposed changes, but you would still have to >>>>>> build >>>>>> pax wicket locally and use the snapshots. When you confirm that the >>>>>> problem >>>>>> I really fixed I can push a release to Central within a Max of 8 hours... >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me know of I can help you in any way. >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind regards, Andreas >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 22, 2012 6:23 PM, "Bram Pouwelse" <b...@pouwelse.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Andreas, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've looked at the PropertyResolver at line 1447 a key is determined >>>>>>> to use in a ConcurrentHashMap [1]. This key is the application >>>>>>> returned by getApplication() after some testing I found out that >>>>>>> equals on application doesn't work by putting >>>>>>> getApplication().equals(getApplication()) in a sample application. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If I remove the special case for equals, hashCode and toString from >>>>>>> the intercept method [2] getApplication().equals(getApplication()) >>>>>>> returns true as I would expect. I've created a similar HashMap in my >>>>>>> test application and a map with Application as a key seems to work >>>>>>> after the change. Didn't have a chance to do any real world test with >>>>>>> this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bram >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/wicket/blob/master/wicket-core/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/core/util/lang/PropertyResolver.java#L1447 >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.wicket/blob/master/service/src/main/java/org/ops4j/pax/wicket/internal/PaxWicketApplicationFactory.java#L115 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2012/10/22 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>> > well, it's quite possible that the CG lib does some quircks here. Has >>>>>>> > anyone already tried to set breakpoints into the PropertyResolver [1] >>>>>>> > checking what's exactly the problem? I'll start tomorrow morning by >>>>>>> > doing exactly this... >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > If getApplication().equals(getApplication()) is really the problem >>>>>>> > (where did you find that code btw?) I might find a workaround for that >>>>>>> > case... let's see to nail down the problem first. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Kind regards, >>>>>>> > Andreas >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > [1] >>>>>>> > https://github.com/apache/wicket/blob/master/wicket-core/src/main/java/org/apache/wicket/core/util/lang/PropertyResolver.java >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Achim Nierbeck >>>>>>> > <bcanh...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >> Oh, one more, >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> after running a Component Report i got the following info about it: >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Empty Collections >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Detected the following empty collections: >>>>>>> >> •6.482.518 instances of >>>>>>> >> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment >>>>>>> >> retain >= 829.762.448 bytes. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Collection Fill Ratios >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Detected the following collections with fill ratios below 20%: >>>>>>> >> •432.156 instances of java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap retain >>>>>>> >> >= >>>>>>> >> 1.018.329.768 bytes. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Map Collision Ratios >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Detected the following maps with collision ratios above 80%: >>>>>>> >> •1 instances of java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap retain >>>>>>> >> 1.038.046.920 bytes. >>>>>>> >> •1 instances of java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment retain >>>>>>> >> 296 bytes. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> I haven't found the root cause of it, but somehow I have the >>>>>>> >> impression this might be an issue of Pax-Wicket? >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> btw. I'm using Pax-Wicket in Version 1.0.2 >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> regards, Achim >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> 2012/10/22 Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>> >>> Here a little update to this, cause today my application did run >>>>>>> >>> into >>>>>>> >>> an OOM due to this (with 1GB Heap) >>>>>>> >>> The current HeapDump shows me >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> That the wicket PropertyResolver uses about 1GB Ram, from those are >>>>>>> >>> about 62MB for >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>> ref >>>>>>> >>> |CGLIB$CALLBACK_0|org.ops4j.pax.wicket.internal.PaxWicketApplicationFactory$WebApplicationWrapper >>>>>>> >>> @ 0xf2b693d0 >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> I guess those are basically the session, looks OK right now. >>>>>>> >>> But the rest is consumed by about 260000 ConcurrentHashMap Entries. >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> For example: >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Type|Name |Value >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>> ref >>>>>>> >>> |CGLIB$CALLBACK_0|org.ops4j.pax.wicket.internal.PaxWicketApplicationFactory$WebApplicationWrapper >>>>>>> >>> @ 0xc1fa0250 >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> I don't know how to say this, but it seems awfully wrong right now >>>>>>> >>> ... >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> regards, Achim >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> 2012/10/22 Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>> >>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> I've seen the exact thing but didn't have the time (yet) to get a >>>>>>> >>>> hold of it. >>>>>>> >>>> But since it's mostly Wicket classes involved I had the impression >>>>>>> >>>> it's wicket itself >>>>>>> >>>> that does this. >>>>>>> >>>> To prove something like it, I wanted to create an example which >>>>>>> >>>> would >>>>>>> >>>> work >>>>>>> >>>> in both world (pax-wicket and wicket) but due to lack of time I >>>>>>> >>>> wasn't able to >>>>>>> >>>> get to it. >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> But since I'm not the only one I'd guess this is something worthy >>>>>>> >>>> to >>>>>>> >>>> investigate :) >>>>>>> >>>> My next test would have been to switch to Wicket 6 (pax-wicket 2.0) >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> regards, Achim >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> 2012/10/22 Bram Pouwelse <b...@pouwelse.com>: >>>>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> I'm working on an application that's using Pax Wicket (version >>>>>>> >>>>> 1.1.0). >>>>>>> >>>>> Because the application is using more memory than expected I'm >>>>>>> >>>>> running >>>>>>> >>>>> some tests and analysing heap dumps for a few days now. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> While analysing the heap of my "weekend test" I've found this at >>>>>>> >>>>> the >>>>>>> >>>>> top of the Pax Wicket bundle class loader at the top of the >>>>>>> >>>>> dominator >>>>>>> >>>>> tree, seems to me that the PropertyResolver is creating new >>>>>>> >>>>> DefaultClassCache instances all the time but I don't understand >>>>>>> >>>>> why. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Below I've pasted a few selections from Eclipse Memory Analyzer: >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Dominator tree: >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Class Name >>>>>>> >>>>> | Shallow Heap | Retained Heap | >>>>>>> >>>>> Percentage >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> org.apache.felix.framework.BundleWiringImpl$BundleClassLoaderJava5 >>>>>>> >>>>> @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xc123ee58 | 88 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 643,602,288 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 89.39% >>>>>>> >>>>> |- java.util.Vector @ 0xc1252208 >>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | 643,566,800 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 89.38% >>>>>>> >>>>> | '- java.lang.Object[1280] @ 0xc2445ee8 >>>>>>> >>>>> | 5,136 | 643,566,768 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 89.38% >>>>>>> >>>>> | |- class org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xb9b5d330 | 32 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 643,420,472 | 89.36% * >>>>>>> >>>>> | | '- java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap @ 0xc2962bf8 >>>>>>> >>>>> | 48 | 643,420,440 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 89.36% >>>>>>> >>>>> | | '- java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment[16] >>>>>>> >>>>> @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xc2962c28 | 80 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 643,420,392 >>>>>>> >>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>> 89.36% >>>>>>> >>>>> | | |- java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$Segment @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xc2963098 | 40 | >>>>>>> >>>>> 643,418,872 >>>>>>> >>>>> | >>>>>>> >>>>> 89.36% ** >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | |- >>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry[262144] @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xd8674190 >>>>>>> >>>>> | 1,048,592 | 643,418,768 | 89.36% >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | '- >>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ 0xea9687a8 >>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | 642,370,176 | 89.22% >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | |- >>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ 0xea967a28 >>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | 642,366,720 | 89.22% >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | | |- >>>>>>> >>>>> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ 0xea966ca8 >>>>>>> >>>>> | 32 | 642,363,264 | 89.22% *** >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | | |- >>>>>>> >>>>> org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver$DefaultClassCache @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xea967398| 16 | 3,424 | 0.00% >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | | '- Total: 2 entries >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | |- >>>>>>> >>>>> org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver$DefaultClassCache @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xea968118 | 16 | 3,424 | 0.00% >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | | '- Total: 2 entries >>>>>>> >>>>> | | | >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> * class org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver @ 0xb9b5d330 >>>>>>> >>>>> [statics]: >>>>>>> >>>>> Type|Name |Value >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |SET |set >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |IS |is >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |GET |get >>>>>>> >>>>> ref >>>>>>> >>>>> |applicationToClassesToGetAndSetters|java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap >>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xc2962bf8 >>>>>>> >>>>> int |RESOLVE_CLASS |2 >>>>>>> >>>>> int |CREATE_NEW_VALUE |1 >>>>>>> >>>>> int |RETURN_NULL |0 >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |log >>>>>>> >>>>> |org.ops4j.pax.logging.slf4j.Slf4jLogger @ 0xc2972ba0 >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> ** java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry[262144] @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xd8674190 [attributes] >>>>>>> >>>>> Type |Name |Value >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> float|loadFactor|0.75 >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |table >>>>>>> >>>>> |java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry[262144] @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xd8674190 >>>>>>> >>>>> int |threshold |196608 >>>>>>> >>>>> int |modCount |185871 >>>>>>> >>>>> int |count |185871 >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |sync >>>>>>> >>>>> |java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock$NonfairSync >>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xc29630c0 >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> *** java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ 0xea966ca8 >>>>>>> >>>>> [attributes] >>>>>>> >>>>> Type|Name |Value >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |next |java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap$HashEntry @ >>>>>>> >>>>> 0xea965f28 >>>>>>> >>>>> ref >>>>>>> >>>>> |value|org.apache.wicket.util.lang.PropertyResolver$DefaultClassCache >>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xea966618 >>>>>>> >>>>> int |hash |1234246985 >>>>>>> >>>>> ref |key >>>>>>> >>>>> |nl.ditp.fabuland.core.internal.WicketApplication$$EnhancerByCGLIB$$4188d86a >>>>>>> >>>>> @ 0xc22bcc88 >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Is this caused by a coding error in the application or a bug in >>>>>>> >>>>> Wicket >>>>>>> >>>>> / Pax Wicket? >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Bram Pouwelse >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> >>>>> general mailing list >>>>>>> >>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>> >>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>>> >>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>>> >>>> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>>> >>>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>>> >>>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & >>>>>>> >>>> Project >>>>>>> >>>> Lead >>>>>>> >>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>>> >>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>>> >>> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>>> >>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>>> >>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & >>>>>>> >>> Project >>>>>>> >>> Lead >>>>>>> >>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>>>> >> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>>>> >> Committer & Project Lead >>>>>>> >> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>>>> >> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & >>>>>>> >> Project >>>>>>> >> Lead >>>>>>> >> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> >> general mailing list >>>>>>> >> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>> >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> > general mailing list >>>>>>> > general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>> > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> general mailing list >>>>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> general mailing list >>>>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>> Committer & Project Lead >>>>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project >>>>> Lead >>>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>> Committer & Project Lead >>>> OPS4J Pax for Vaadin >>>> <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project >>>> Lead >>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> general mailing list >>>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> general mailing list >>> general@lists.ops4j.org >>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >> >> _______________________________________________ >> general mailing list >> general@lists.ops4j.org >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > general@lists.ops4j.org > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general -- Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead OPS4J Pax for Vaadin <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project Lead blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> _______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.ops4j.org http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
