-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Nick,
On 2/22/12 7:52 PM, Nick Williams wrote: > Now, at the end of each request, I am calling: > > threadLocalInstance.set(null); > > threadLocalInstance.remove(); If you are creating a ThreadLocal for each request (that needs the object) and then disposing of it, why bother with the ThreadLocal in the first place? Is this a case of wanting global-variable semantics and just being lazy about (not) passing arguments around? > I’m still getting these four messages, and I can’t seem to get them > to go away. But I have tracked down these specific instances and I > *am* calling set(null) and remove() on these instances. Does it always happen? Perhaps you are encountering an exception and your .remove() isn't being called in certain cases. Consider a 'finally' block? > Is something about the Tomcat code somehow locating “phantom” > references to ThreadLocals that have actually been removed and ARE > really eligible for GC, or am I really just not always clearing > those ThreadLocals and I just still haven’t tracked down the > source? Tomcat just looks at the ThreadLocals still left over in a Thread after your webapp is stopped. There's nothing "phantom" about them. - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk9K7icACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PBFsgCfT1Y+Mj4C40rwNUAp1wk38e+e m1IAn22T17lUBZAQ3t9zYBoll5TzEL30 =3Ndj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
