[GitHub] flink issue #4591: [FLINK-7514][tests] fix BackPressureStatsTrackerITCase re...

2017-09-28 Thread NicoK 
Github user NicoK commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4591
  
ok, that last rebase was missing an import - fixed now


---

[GitHub] flink issue #4591: [FLINK-7514][tests] fix BackPressureStatsTrackerITCase re...

2017-09-27 Thread tillrohrmann 
Github user tillrohrmann commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4591
  
Thanks for your contribution @NicoK and the reviews @pnowojski and @zentol. 
Changes look good. If Travis passes, then I'll merge the PR.


---

[GitHub] flink issue #4591: [FLINK-7514][tests] fix BackPressureStatsTrackerITCase re...

2017-09-27 Thread NicoK 
Github user NicoK commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4591
  
rebased to make it mergable again


---

[GitHub] flink issue #4591: [FLINK-7514][tests] fix BackPressureStatsTrackerITCase re...

2017-09-19 Thread NicoK 
Github user NicoK commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4591
  
@zentol unfortunately, when changing to using Netty's buffer counting, it 
will check any form of illegal reference count usages, and a double-free is one 
of them. Even without Netty, this pattern could result from an invalid use and 
may be guarded the same way.


---

[GitHub] flink issue #4591: [FLINK-7514][tests] fix BackPressureStatsTrackerITCase re...

2017-09-19 Thread zentol 
Github user zentol commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4591
  
I'm wondering about the benefit here. The existing code guarantees that all 
buffers would be recycled in case of test failure; don't these changes allow a 
memory leak? Isn't `recycle()` safe anyway since it is a No-Op if called 
multiple times without `retain()`?


---