Skip to content

Conversation

@cnlangzi
Copy link
Contributor

@cnlangzi cnlangzi commented Aug 5, 2021

fixed #294

@cnlangzi cnlangzi requested review from Sriep and moldis August 5, 2021 15:45
@moldis
Copy link
Contributor

moldis commented Aug 11, 2021

Sounds good. Could you give some trace before your changes (with memory leak) and after, to be sure it's gone?

Copy link
Contributor

@moldis moldis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Requested the trace to identify memory leak

Copy link
Contributor

@Sriep Sriep left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should have a unit test.

@cnlangzi
Copy link
Contributor Author

cnlangzi commented Aug 13, 2021

Sounds good. Could you give some trace before your changes (with memory leak) and after, to be sure it's gone?

I have updated detail about memory leak on #294. I found this issue on code review , not runtime. And it is easy to understand why it is memory leak issue. Because mutex never be removed from memory. A data row is asking a mutex. It is an issue for a long-running blobber instance

@cnlangzi cnlangzi merged commit 378793a into master Aug 16, 2021
@cnlangzi cnlangzi deleted the fix/lockmutex branch August 16, 2021 16:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

It might be a memory leak issue

4 participants