Skip to content

Fix check read failed entry memory leak issue. #4513

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

horizonzy
Copy link
Member

When checking the read failed entry, it doesn't release the data when read successfully.

@horizonzy horizonzy closed this Oct 23, 2024
@horizonzy horizonzy reopened this Oct 23, 2024
@@ -351,6 +352,8 @@ private boolean tryReadingFaultyEntries(LedgerHandle lh, LedgerFragment ledgerFr
lh.asyncReadEntries(entryIdToRead, entryIdToRead, (rc, ledHan, seq, ctx) -> {
long thisEntryId = (Long) ctx;
if (rc == BKException.Code.OK) {
LedgerEntry entry = seq.nextElement();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it possible for seq to have multiple elements? It would be better to check with hasMoreElements here.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think

  1. hasMoreElements needs to be judged.
  2. at the same time, if (rc == BKException.Code.OK) is true or not, this release needs to be added.
  3. then I suggest adding a testcase to cover it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it possible for seq to have multiple elements? It would be better to check with hasMoreElements here.

Make sense.

at the same time, if (rc == BKException.Code.OK) is true or not, this release needs to be added.

For this case, if the rc == BKException.Code.OK is false, the seq will be null, we don't need to release the seq.

Copy link
Member

@StevenLuMT StevenLuMT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good jobs

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants