Am Dienstag, den 12.09.2006, 00:49 +0200 schrieb Stefano Bagnara: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > An increase in traffic would not result in a consistent ~2MB per day > > decrease in available heap space after a GC. By definition, memory that is > > consumed and not released is a memory leak. > > No, I don't agree with this definition of leak. > Even Wikipedia have a better definition: > > "In computer science, a memory leak is a particular kind of > unintentional memory consumption by a computer program where the program > fails to release memory when no longer needed" > > The key here is *unintentional* and *no* *longer* *needed*. > > If you can demostrate that the allocated memory is no longer needed and > that failing to deallocate it caused an OOM error then you demostrated > you have a leak. > > Btw, I don't care of this formal discussions. I'm interested in > resolving this bug. I think I did everything I could have done with the > informations you provided, so I will wait for you. > > I don't want to release james 2.3.0 final with an open bug about a > memory leak. So I'm +1 to release 2.3.0RC3, but before 2.3.0 final the > bug has to be closed or at least I want to know what exactly is leaking > before deciding wether we can ignore it or not. > > Stefano >
My too.. So let us vote for RC3 now and release it. Should i rebuild,sign,upload releases ? Or nothing changed since noel did it ? bye Norman
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
