fix: address derived memory leak on disconnection from reactive graph #11819
Conversation
This file contains 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
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 64edec8 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
dummdidumm
reviewed
May 29, 2024
Co-authored-by: Simon H <5968653+dummdidumm@users.noreply.github.com>
dummdidumm
approved these changes
May 29, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #11817.
It turns out that we weren't fully handling the disconnection of derived signals from the reactivity graph – resulting in cases where they could leak memory because they were not being removed from their dependency reactions array. However, removing ourselves from this array meant that any future changes might mean we need to reconnect the derived to the graph again – so we have to do some additional bookkeeping to make this work. Thankfully, we already have versioning because of unowned deriveds, we can use the versions to understand if the owned derived signal is dirty after being connected to the reactivity graph again – something we couldn't do in early permutations of the signal architecture – and likely why we hadn't addressed this in the same sense.