On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 13:17, Dieter Maurer wrote: > Jeremy Hylton wrote at 2003-12-7 23:01 -0500: > >On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 08:15, Dieter Maurer wrote: > >> ATT: replacing the cache without clearing it can lead to huge > >> memory leaks (everything in the old cache is leaked!). > > > >Without commenting on the rest of the bug report, I should mention that > >caches and persistent objects all participate in cyclic GC. They will > >not leak the way pre-2.8 caches did. > > Has the "do not free when a cycle contains an object with destructor" > restriction been removed from the cyclic GC? > > It is not unlikely that the cache references an object with a "__del__". > This may keep the cache and all its content.
I don't think it makes a lot of sense to put an __del__ method on a Persistent object. When would you expect it to be called? Every time the object is turned into a ghost? When the object is removed by pack? I can imagine some people would try to migrate non-persistent code to ZODB and have to deal with __del__ then. If I were doing that, I'd make sure to check gc.garbage when I tested and fix any code that caused leaks. Jeremy _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
