After discussing this on java-dev:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-java-dev/200807.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
it seems that this is not in fact a leak but rather a delayed GC
issue. The objects are eventually freed, on Sun 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6.
When a ThreadLocal instance becomes unreferenced & GC'd, Java does not
immediately reclaim the now-unreferenced objects, if the thread
remains alive. However, over time, as other ThreadLocals are used
with that thread, those stale objects do eventually get reclaimed. So
my feeling for now is it's OK for Lucene to continue to use non-static
ThreadLocals.
Mike
Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Michael McCandless
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So now I'm confused: the SegmentReader itself should no longer be
reachable,
assuming you are not holding any references to your IndexReader.
Which means the ThreadLocal instance should no longer be reachable.
It will still be referenced from the Thread(s) ThreadLocalMap
The key (the ThreadLocal) will be weakly referenced, but the values
(now stale) are strongly referenced and won't be actually removed
until the table is resized (under the Java6 impl at least).
Nice huh?
-Yonik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
