Skip to main content


Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Eclipse Projects » Remote Application Platform (RAP) » Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter
Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #129763] Thu, 23 April 2009 11:58 Go to next message
Loïc Bertholet is currently offline Loïc BertholetFriend
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009
Member
Hi all,

I have a memory leak issue in my application that, I think, comes from the
JobManagerAdpater. Indeed, in the method done(final IJobChangeEvent
event), there is the following code :

Job job = event.getJob();
if( !job.shouldSchedule() ) {
jobs.remove( job );
}

However, shouldSchedule() always returns true so that the job is never
removed from jobs.

I'm using a job in an Editor and when this editor is closed, he is still
present in the JVM because of this job which is still contained in the
JobManagerAdpater jobs.

Fortunately, everything is well released when session is unvalidated.

I use a workaround by overriding the shouldSchedule() method but I think
this behavior is strange because not the same in RCP.

Moreover, the status bar keep displaying my job's name, even when it is
done, until another job is executed...

Loïc
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #129790 is a reply to message #129763] Thu, 23 April 2009 12:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Loïc Bertholet is currently offline Loïc BertholetFriend
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009
Member
Even with the workaround, I still have my memory leak because the job has
been put in the SessionStore thanks to bindToSession(final Object
keyToRemove) which is called by the JobManagerAdapter scheduled(...)
method.

Why is it put in SessionStore and how can I remove it without doing
specific RAP stuff (my wish is to have the same code running in RCP and
RAP).

Thanks.

Loïc
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #129802 is a reply to message #129790] Thu, 23 April 2009 12:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Loïc Bertholet is currently offline Loïc BertholetFriend
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009
Member
One more thing, my job is not a user job (job.isUser() returns false).

Loïc Bertholet wrote:

> Even with the workaround, I still have my memory leak because the job has
> been put in the SessionStore thanks to bindToSession(final Object
> keyToRemove) which is called by the JobManagerAdapter scheduled(...)
> method.

> Why is it put in SessionStore and how can I remove it without doing
> specific RAP stuff (my wish is to have the same code running in RCP and
> RAP).

> Thanks.

> Loïc
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #130123 is a reply to message #129790] Fri, 24 April 2009 12:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Loïc Bertholet is currently offline Loïc BertholetFriend
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009
Member
Hi all,

I want to point your attention on this method because I don't understand
its behavior and it causes, I think, an important memory leak.

private void bindToSession( final Object keyToRemove ) {
ISessionStore session = RWT.getSessionStore();
HttpSessionBindingListener watchDog = new HttpSessionBindingListener()
{
public void valueBound( final HttpSessionBindingEvent event ) {
}
public void valueUnbound( final HttpSessionBindingEvent event ) {
try {
handleWatchDog( keyToRemove );
} finally {
synchronized( lock ) {
jobs.remove( keyToRemove );
}
}
}

private void handleWatchDog( final Object keyToRemove ) {
//
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////
// TODO [fappel]: Very ugly hack to avoid a memory leak.
// As a job can not be removed from the
// running set directly, I use reflection. Jobs
// can be catched in the set on session timeouts.
// Don't know a proper solution yet.
// Note that this is still under investigation.
if( keyToRemove instanceof Job ) {
final Job jobToRemove = ( Job )keyToRemove;
Display display = ( Display )jobs.get( jobToRemove );
if( display != null ) {
UICallBack.runNonUIThreadWithFakeContext( display, new
Runnable() {
public void run() {
jobToRemove.cancel();
jobToRemove.addJobChangeListener( new JobCanceler() );
}
} );
}
try {
IJobManager jobManager = Job.getJobManager();
Class clazz = jobManager.getClass();
Field running = clazz.getDeclaredField( "running" );
running.setAccessible( true );
Set set = ( Set )running.get( jobManager );
synchronized( lock ) {
set.remove( keyToRemove );
// still sometimes job get catched - use the job marker
adapter
// to check whether they can be eliminated
Object[] runningJobs = set.toArray();
for( int i = 0; i < runningJobs.length; i++ ) {
Job toCheck = ( Job )runningJobs[ i ];
IJobMarker marker
= ( IJobMarker )toCheck.getAdapter( IJobMarker.class );
if( marker != null && marker.canBeRemoved() ) {
set.remove( toCheck );
}
}
}
} catch( final Throwable thr ) {
// TODO [fappel]: exception handling
thr.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
};
session.setAttribute( String.valueOf( watchDog.hashCode() ), watchDog
);
}

As I say, it is called by the JobManagerAdapter scheduled(...) method.
watchDog is put in the session with it hashCode as key but is never
removed from it.
Moreover it is a HttpSessionBindingListener whose valueUnbound method will
never be called as this object is instantiated inside the method and can
not be retrieved so session.setAttribute(...) won't be called again with
the same key.
So as I run a job, bindToSession(...) is called by scheduled() like 4
times and I have 4 watchDog inside the session...

Am I missing something ?
Is this a bug ?
Do you have a workaround ?

Thanks,

Loïc

Loïc Bertholet wrote:

> Even with the workaround, I still have my memory leak because the job has
> been put in the SessionStore thanks to bindToSession(final Object
> keyToRemove) which is called by the JobManagerAdapter scheduled(...)
> method.

> Why is it put in SessionStore and how can I remove it without doing
> specific RAP stuff (my wish is to have the same code running in RCP and
> RAP).

> Thanks.

> Loïc
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #130411 is a reply to message #130123] Mon, 27 April 2009 15:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rüdiger Herrmann is currently offline Rüdiger HerrmannFriend
Messages: 581
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Loïc,

just to clarify: the memory leak you describe is resolved after the
session terminates, right?

Cheers,
Rüdiger


Loïc Bertholet wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I want to point your attention on this method because I don't understand
> its behavior and it causes, I think, an important memory leak.
>
> private void bindToSession( final Object keyToRemove ) {
> ISessionStore session = RWT.getSessionStore();
> HttpSessionBindingListener watchDog = new HttpSessionBindingListener() {
> public void valueBound( final HttpSessionBindingEvent event ) {
> }
> public void valueUnbound( final HttpSessionBindingEvent event ) {
> try {
> handleWatchDog( keyToRemove );
> } finally {
> synchronized( lock ) {
> jobs.remove( keyToRemove );
> }
> }
> }
>
> private void handleWatchDog( final Object keyToRemove ) {
> //
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////
> // TODO [fappel]: Very ugly hack to avoid a memory leak.
> // As a job can not be removed from the
> // running set directly, I use reflection. Jobs
> // can be catched in the set on session timeouts.
> // Don't know a proper solution yet.
> // Note that this is still under investigation.
> if( keyToRemove instanceof Job ) {
> final Job jobToRemove = ( Job )keyToRemove;
> Display display = ( Display )jobs.get( jobToRemove );
> if( display != null ) {
> UICallBack.runNonUIThreadWithFakeContext( display, new
> Runnable() {
> public void run() {
> jobToRemove.cancel();
> jobToRemove.addJobChangeListener( new JobCanceler() );
> }
> } );
> }
> try {
> IJobManager jobManager = Job.getJobManager();
> Class clazz = jobManager.getClass();
> Field running = clazz.getDeclaredField( "running" );
> running.setAccessible( true );
> Set set = ( Set )running.get( jobManager );
> synchronized( lock ) {
> set.remove( keyToRemove );
> // still sometimes job get catched - use the job marker
> adapter
> // to check whether they can be eliminated
> Object[] runningJobs = set.toArray();
> for( int i = 0; i < runningJobs.length; i++ ) {
> Job toCheck = ( Job )runningJobs[ i ];
> IJobMarker marker
> = ( IJobMarker )toCheck.getAdapter( IJobMarker.class );
> if( marker != null && marker.canBeRemoved() ) {
> set.remove( toCheck );
> }
> }
> }
> } catch( final Throwable thr ) {
> // TODO [fappel]: exception handling
> thr.printStackTrace();
> }
> }
> }
> };
> session.setAttribute( String.valueOf( watchDog.hashCode() ), watchDog );
> }
>
> As I say, it is called by the JobManagerAdapter scheduled(...) method.
> watchDog is put in the session with it hashCode as key but is never
> removed from it.
> Moreover it is a HttpSessionBindingListener whose valueUnbound method
> will never be called as this object is instantiated inside the method
> and can not be retrieved so session.setAttribute(...) won't be called
> again with the same key.
> So as I run a job, bindToSession(...) is called by scheduled() like 4
> times and I have 4 watchDog inside the session...
>
> Am I missing something ?
> Is this a bug ?
> Do you have a workaround ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Loïc
>
> Loïc Bertholet wrote:
>
>> Even with the workaround, I still have my memory leak because the job
>> has been put in the SessionStore thanks to bindToSession(final Object
>> keyToRemove) which is called by the JobManagerAdapter scheduled(...)
>> method.
>
>> Why is it put in SessionStore and how can I remove it without doing
>> specific RAP stuff (my wish is to have the same code running in RCP
>> and RAP).
>
>> Thanks.
>
>> Loïc
>
>
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #130424 is a reply to message #130411] Mon, 27 April 2009 17:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Loïc Bertholet is currently offline Loïc BertholetFriend
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009
Member
Yes it is Rüdiger.

Regards,
Loïc

Rüdiger Herrmann wrote:

> Loïc,

> just to clarify: the memory leak you describe is resolved after the
> session terminates, right?

> Cheers,
> Rüdiger
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #130460 is a reply to message #130424] Mon, 27 April 2009 19:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rüdiger Herrmann is currently offline Rüdiger HerrmannFriend
Messages: 581
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Could you file a bugzilla to track progress on this issue?

Thanks
Rüdiger


Loïc Bertholet wrote:
> Yes it is Rüdiger.
>
> Regards,
> Loïc
>
> Rüdiger Herrmann wrote:
>
>> Loïc,
>
>> just to clarify: the memory leak you describe is resolved after the
>> session terminates, right?
>
>> Cheers,
>> Rüdiger
>
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #130475 is a reply to message #130460] Tue, 28 April 2009 07:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Loïc Bertholet is currently offline Loïc BertholetFriend
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009
Member
Yes I will do it.

Should I create 2 different issues ?
- one for the "shouldSchedule" behavior that differs from RCP (my first
post)
- one for the "bindToSession" problem

Are you working on it and do you think it will be fixed for the M7 release
?

Thanks,

Loïc

Rüdiger Herrmann wrote:

> Could you file a bugzilla to track progress on this issue?

> Thanks
> Rüdiger
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #130498 is a reply to message #130475] Tue, 28 April 2009 11:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rüdiger Herrmann is currently offline Rüdiger HerrmannFriend
Messages: 581
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
yes, in doubt open two bugs. We can still close one if it turns out
to be a duplicate or otherwise obsolete.

Loïc Bertholet wrote:
> Yes I will do it.
>
> Should I create 2 different issues ?
> - one for the "shouldSchedule" behavior that differs from RCP (my first
> post)
> - one for the "bindToSession" problem
>
> Are you working on it and do you think it will be fixed for the M7
> release ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Loïc
>
> Rüdiger Herrmann wrote:
>
>> Could you file a bugzilla to track progress on this issue?
>
>> Thanks
>> Rüdiger
>
Re: Problem with Job and JobManagerAdapter [message #130510 is a reply to message #130498] Tue, 28 April 2009 12:37 Go to previous message
Loïc Bertholet is currently offline Loïc BertholetFriend
Messages: 57
Registered: July 2009
Member
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=274017
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=274021

Thanks
Loïc

Rüdiger Herrmann wrote:

> yes, in doubt open two bugs. We can still close one if it turns out
> to be a duplicate or otherwise obsolete.

> Loïc Bertholet wrote:
>> Yes I will do it.
>>
>> Should I create 2 different issues ?
>> - one for the "shouldSchedule" behavior that differs from RCP (my first
>> post)
>> - one for the "bindToSession" problem
>>
>> Are you working on it and do you think it will be fixed for the M7
>> release ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Loïc
>>
>> Rüdiger Herrmann wrote:
>>
>>> Could you file a bugzilla to track progress on this issue?
>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Rüdiger
>>
Previous Topic:NLS problem: switching locales
Next Topic:Text.setEchoChar missing
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Jan 27 02:52:38 GMT 2023

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03058 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software

Back to the top