[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-24 Thread lvfangmin
Github user lvfangmin commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @anmolnar here are some clarifications based on your comments: * #611 is not needed anymore because the issue @wangchaod reported here is due to the 'leaking' watcher entry in

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-21 Thread asfgit
Github user asfgit commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed): https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-ZOOKEEPER-github-pr-build/2221/ ---

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-21 Thread anmolnar
Github user anmolnar commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @lvfangmin Let me try to wrap what has been discussed with this issue so far. - You're saying that #611 is not needed, because this PR fixes it and don't need to maintain `watch2Paths`

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-13 Thread lvfangmin
Github user lvfangmin commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @wangchaod it would be great if you can confirm this is fixed, so that we can abandon the PR. ---

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-13 Thread lvfangmin
Github user lvfangmin commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @hanm based on @wangchaod's description in the JIRA, #612 should fix the exact issue. @anmolnar as I commented in the JIRA, not removing the empty map is optimized from performance

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-13 Thread anmolnar
Github user anmolnar commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @wangchaod can we move on? ---

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-06 Thread hanm
Github user hanm commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 #612 is now merged. @wangchaod Do you know what was the root cause of your OOM issue? Were you using Netty instead of NIO? Would #612 fix your case? I am curious if #612 does not fix your case

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-09-05 Thread anmolnar
Github user anmolnar commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @enixon I think it leaks the map anyway, because when the new Watcher is added, new Watcher instance gets created which will be added to Map anyway and the empty one remains forever.

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-08-31 Thread wangchaod
Github user wangchaod commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @lvfangmin OK thanks ---

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-08-30 Thread lvfangmin
Github user lvfangmin commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @wangchaod just send another PR for removing the watcher when closing netty cnxn: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/612. As I mentioned, this will also be fixed in PR of

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-08-29 Thread wangchaod
Github user wangchaod commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 @enixon In my running environment, the temporarily empty state of its watch set will not pass soon. So then, the empty watcher increases to more than 10 thousand, and the OutOfMemoryError

[GitHub] zookeeper issue #611: ZOOKEEPER-3131

2018-08-29 Thread enixon
Github user enixon commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/611 I see. It depends on what you are optimizing. The Watcher will be removed from watch2Paths when the ServerCnxn for it is closed. Keeping a set in the map for it strikes me as an optimization based