> Exactly which versions were you using when you ran your tests? According to my notes: 7.0.59, which should've been the most recent version available at the time (about this time last year).
To clarify: that was the version we did a heap dump analysis of, and noted the memory increase related to Manifest objects. The version used for the test procedure in this thread's original message -- last performed last week -- was 7.0.67 and we did not do a heap analysis of it (only noting that at a glance it resulted in approximately the same amount of heap increase correlating with JAR scanning as we saw with last year's version). On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 3:55 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > On 16/02/2016 20:14, Ty wrote: > >> JAR scanning should be transient. What was it that was causing the 10-20 > >> fold increase? > > > > From memory (this was a while ago), it was related to > > java.util.jar.Manifest objects, or what they contained/referenced. I'd > be > > glad to do another heap analysis and summarize it if it would help, but > > even more glad to just skip Tomcat 7 altogether. > > There was an issue related to caching of Manifest instances but that > should have been fixed. Exactly which versions were you using when you > ran your tests? > > Mark > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org > >
