Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 52585 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2009 21:01:29 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Jan 2009 21:01:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 13000 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2009 21:01:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-activemq-dev-archive@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 12814 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2009 21:01:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 12802 invoked by uid 99); 30 Jan 2009 21:01:29 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:01:28 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,WHOIS_NETSOLPR X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 21:01:22 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0436234C4B0 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:01:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1015015632.1233349261851.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:01:01 -0800 (PST) From: "Brian Roach (JIRA)" To: dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (AMQCPP-220) Memory leak in activemq-cpp In-Reply-To: <991456988.1233116939364.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-220?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=49063#action_49063 ] Brian Roach commented on AMQCPP-220: ------------------------------------ Yeah, that's what I get for trying to optimize the pool usage, sorry. My original change was to create and destroy a pool within the wait() call. I'll revert back to that. Using the simpleConsumer example code (or our own) I never encountered the multiple thread issue. > Memory leak in activemq-cpp > --------------------------- > > Key: AMQCPP-220 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-220 > Project: ActiveMQ C++ Client > Issue Type: Bug > Components: CMS Impl > Affects Versions: 2.2.3 > Environment: Solaris 10 x86 > GCC (g++) 3.4.6 (from www.sunfreeware.com) > APR 1.3.3 > APR-util 1.3.4 > Reporter: Brian Roach > Assignee: Timothy Bish > Priority: Critical > Attachments: amq.patch > > > The API leaks ~ 2MB of memory for every 1 million messages consumed. > The example consumer in activemq-cpp-2.2.3-src/src/examples/consumers can be used as a test bed, it exhibits the behavior. > It's even worse if you are not using the consumer->setMessageListener( ) method and are instead directly using the consumer->receive() method in your own loop. I dont' have hard numbers but it is somewhere around ten-fold. > We have an application which is processing ~ 40 million messages per day, and will keep growing until the box runs out of memory. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.