TOMEE-4192 ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release by G-Ork · Pull Request #1030 · apache/tomee

G-Ork · 2023-03-19T12:34:41Z

No description provided.

- Added Inherited annotation. - Added unittests to proove fix.

G-Ork · 2023-03-24T15:01:25Z

Thank you all...

rzo1 · 2023-03-24T17:32:00Z

Thanks for the PR @G-Ork !

rzo1

Looks like we have some regressions with this change:

org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerAndApplicationRulesTest.test
org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerApplicationRuleTest.run

specifically:

java.lang.NullPointerException
	at org.apache.openejb.testing.ApplicationComposers.after(ApplicationComposers.java:1112)
	at org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerRule$1.evaluate(ContainerRule.java:47)
	at org.junit.rules.RunRules.evaluate(RunRules.java:20)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306)
	at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner$1.evaluate(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:100)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:366)
	at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:103)
	at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:63)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$4.run(ParentRunner.java:331)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:79)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:329)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$100(ParentRunner.java:66)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:293)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306)
	at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:413)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:377)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeWithRerun(JUnit4Provider.java:284)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:248)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:167)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:456)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.execute(ForkedBooter.java:169)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.run(ForkedBooter.java:595)
	at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:581

Would you mind having a look? I guess, that it would be sufficient to add null checks.

CI:

G-Ork · 2023-03-27T11:39:13Z

Hi I will look. Give me some days to overcome corona. Richard Zowalla ***@***.***> schrieb am Mo., 27. März 2023, 12:56:

…

***@***.**** requested changes on this pull request. Looks like we have some regressions with this change: org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerAndApplicationRulesTest.test org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerApplicationRuleTest.run specifically: java.lang.NullPointerException at org.apache.openejb.testing.ApplicationComposers.after(ApplicationComposers.java:1112) at org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerRule$1.evaluate(ContainerRule.java:47) at org.junit.rules.RunRules.evaluate(RunRules.java:20) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner$1.evaluate(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:100) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:366) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:103) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:63) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$4.run(ParentRunner.java:331) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:79) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:329) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$100(ParentRunner.java:66) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:293) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:413) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:377) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeWithRerun(JUnit4Provider.java:284) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:248) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:167) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:456) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.execute(ForkedBooter.java:169) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.run(ForkedBooter.java:595) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:581 Would you mind having a look? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1030 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGZCNF6D3SIZNBW3BRWZ5QDW6FW7FANCNFSM6AAAAAAWACYBRY> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

rzo1 · 2023-03-27T11:40:45Z

Hi I will look. Give me some days to overcome corona. Richard Zowalla @.> schrieb am Mo., 27. März 2023, 12:56:
…
@.* requested changes on this pull request. Looks like we have some regressions with this change: org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerAndApplicationRulesTest.test org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerApplicationRuleTest.run specifically: java.lang.NullPointerException at org.apache.openejb.testing.ApplicationComposers.after(ApplicationComposers.java:1112) at org.apache.openejb.junit.ContainerRule$1.evaluate(ContainerRule.java:47) at org.junit.rules.RunRules.evaluate(RunRules.java:20) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner$1.evaluate(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:100) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:366) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:103) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:63) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$4.run(ParentRunner.java:331) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:79) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:329) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$100(ParentRunner.java:66) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:293) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:413) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.execute(JUnit4Provider.java:377) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeWithRerun(JUnit4Provider.java:284) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:248) at org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:167) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.runSuitesInProcess(ForkedBooter.java:456) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.execute(ForkedBooter.java:169) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.run(ForkedBooter.java:595) at org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:581 Would you mind having a look? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1030 (review)>, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGZCNF6D3SIZNBW3BRWZ5QDW6FW7FANCNFSM6AAAAAAWACYBRY . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

Sure. Get well soon (also had it last week, therefore my late response)

case of legacy junit rules.

G-Ork

I've changed the code to integrate better with older junit testrules:

Added an null-check to prevent NPE
move the reference resets to stopApplication()

this should also free references in older junit tests. The Fix is necessary because in this case two composers are active. One do not have an appContext initialized. The one with an context do not call after() just stopApplication().

rzo1

Builds (9,8) looking good with this change. Thanks for the PR @G-Ork

rzo1 · 2023-04-04T17:57:22Z

Thanks @G-Ork

…apache#1030) * TOMEE-4192 ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release

G-Ork added 3 commits March 12, 2023 08:53

TOMEE-4190 RunWithApplicationComposer should support inheritance

ab06028

- Added Inherited annotation. - Added unittests to proove fix.

Merge branch 'apache:main' into main

0be4ff4

TOMEE-4192 ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release

e222a33

rzo1 approved these changes Mar 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

rzo1 added port-to-9.x-required port-to-8.x-required labels Mar 24, 2023

rzo1 requested changes Mar 27, 2023

View reviewed changes

move cleanup code to shared api and add null check to prevent NPE in

9cf5697

case of legacy junit rules.

G-Ork commented Mar 29, 2023

View reviewed changes

G-Ork requested a review from rzo1 March 29, 2023 15:08

rzo1 approved these changes Mar 31, 2023

View reviewed changes

This was referenced Mar 31, 2023

TOMEE-4192 - ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release #1031

Merged

TOMEE-4192 - ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release #1032

Merged

rzo1 merged commit 9d9991b into apache:main Apr 4, 2023

cesarhernandezgt pushed a commit to cesarhernandezgt/tomee that referenced this pull request May 24, 2023

TOMEE-4192 ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release (…

327ca6b

…apache#1030) * TOMEE-4192 ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

TOMEE-4192 ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release#1030

TOMEE-4192 ApplicationComposers do not clear GC references on release#1030
rzo1 merged 4 commits intoapache:mainfrom
G-Ork:TOMEE-4192

G-Ork commented Mar 19, 2023

Uh oh!

G-Ork commented Mar 24, 2023

Uh oh!

rzo1 commented Mar 24, 2023

Uh oh!

rzo1 left a comment •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

G-Ork commented Mar 27, 2023 via email

Uh oh!

rzo1 commented Mar 27, 2023

Uh oh!

G-Ork left a comment •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

rzo1 left a comment

Uh oh!

rzo1 commented Apr 4, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Conversation

G-Ork commented Mar 19, 2023

Uh oh!

G-Ork commented Mar 24, 2023

Uh oh!

rzo1 commented Mar 24, 2023

Uh oh!

rzo1 left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

G-Ork commented Mar 27, 2023 via email

Uh oh!

rzo1 commented Mar 27, 2023

Uh oh!

G-Ork left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rzo1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rzo1 commented Apr 4, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

rzo1 left a comment •

edited

Loading

G-Ork left a comment •

edited

Loading