CAMEL-24146: Fix FluentProducerTemplate leak in InMemorySagaCoordinator#24830
Merged
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Claus Ibsen <claus.ibsen@gmail.com>
Contributor
|
🌟 Thank you for your contribution to the Apache Camel project! 🌟 🐫 Apache Camel Committers, please review the following items:
|
gnodet
approved these changes
Jul 17, 2026
gnodet
left a comment
gnodet
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Claude Code on behalf of gnodet
LGTM — straightforward resource leak fix.
Every doFinalize() call created a new FluentProducerTemplate that was never stopped, leaking a ProducerTemplate with its producer cache on each invocation (including retries). The fix is clean:
-
Proper lifecycle — shared
ProducerTemplatecreated indoStart(), stopped indoStop(), following the same pattern asexecutorService. Null guard handles restart scenarios. -
Thread-safe —
ProducerTemplateis designed to be shared across threads, so reusing it across concurrent coordinator finalization calls is correct. -
Simplification — replacing
createFluentProducerTemplate().to(endpoint).withExchange(target).send()withproducerTemplate.send(endpoint, target)is a clean simplification — the fluent API added no value for this single-endpoint, exchange-based send. -
Consistent API —
getProducerTemplate()mirrors the existinggetExecutorService()pattern on the same class.
Minimal change, clear impact.
This was referenced Jul 17, 2026
Contributor
|
🧪 CI tested the following changed modules:
🔬 Scalpel shadow comparison — Scalpel: 550 tested, 29 compile-only — current: 550 all testedMaveniverse Scalpel detected 579 affected modules (current approach: 550).
|
oscerd
approved these changes
Jul 17, 2026
oscerd
left a comment
oscerd
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM — clean leak fix. Creating a FluentProducerTemplate per finalization call leaked it (never closed); replacing it with a single lifecycle-managed ProducerTemplate created in doStart() and stopped+nulled in doStop() (mirroring the existing executorService pattern, null-guarded for restart) fixes that, and getProducerTemplate().send(endpoint, target) is semantically identical to the old .to(endpoint).withExchange(target).send(). ProducerTemplate is thread-safe for concurrent finalization. (No direct no-leak assertion, which is fair — hard to unit-test; covered indirectly by the existing retry-path test.)
Reviewed with Claude Code on behalf of Andrea Cosentino. This review was generated by an AI agent and may contain inaccuracies; please verify all suggestions before applying.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Claude Code on behalf of davsclaus
InMemorySagaCoordinator.doFinalizecreated a newFluentProducerTemplateper compensation/completion call (including retries) and never stopped it. Each leaked template holds a startedProducerTemplatewith a producer cache (default max 1000). With the default 5 retry attempts, a single saga finalization could leak up to N*5 templates.Fix: Create a shared
ProducerTemplateinInMemorySagaService(which already hasdoStart/doStoplifecycle) and reuse it across all coordinator finalization calls. TheFluentProducerTemplatewas overkill here — the only call was.to(endpoint).withExchange(target).send(), which delegates toProducerTemplate.send(Endpoint, Exchange).Changes:
InMemorySagaService: add aProducerTemplatefield, create indoStart(), stop indoStop()InMemorySagaCoordinator: replace per-callcreateFluentProducerTemplate()with the sharedsagaService.getProducerTemplate().send()Test plan
SagaTest,SagaFailuresTest,SagaOptionsTest,SagaPropagationTest,SagaRemoveHeadersTest,SagaTimeoutTest,SagaComponentTest)SagaFailuresTestexercises the retry code path where the leak was most severeCo-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 noreply@anthropic.com