This is very interesting... I don't have any threadlocal in my app but at every redeployment the memory is increasing. I had a quick look at the tapestry source code and there is a bunch of ThreadLocal.set(null). But it seems that in your case, they are not affecting the perm memory? Where are your tapestry jar files? Are they inside the war or in common?
On 6/13/06, Cliff Zhao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I did some tests and the results are very promising. I use one ThreadLocal variable in my Tapestry application. It took about 4.5MB for every re-deployment from Perm Memory and never went down. After I changed the ThreadLocal.set(null) to ThreadLocal.remove(), the Perm Memory was stablized at 31MB. My theory is WORKING. I used JBOSS 4.0.4.GA Patch 1 and JDK5.0 Update 7 on Windows XP. I strongly suggest to use ThreadLocal.remove() instead of ThreadLocal.set(null). I think that people will be interested in the findings, so, I send it to both lists. Best Regards, Cliff Zhao On 6/11/06, Henri Dupre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 6/11/06, Cliff Zhao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Any thoughts? > > > In the tomcat faq, they say that this is a classloader issue and cannot be > solved. > Not sure how the threadlocals affect that... > > Thanks, > > Henri. > >
-- Thanks, Henri.
