同步方法的weakValue映射引用中的内存泄漏
我正在创建一个用于并发执行方法的接口,同时抽象出同步细节(在需要时交换分布式实现)。我创建了一个单一的 jvm 实现,它允许将字符串存储在映射中,以确保使用一个引用,从而将字符串用作互斥体,即使传入不同引用的字符串也是如此。并发性似乎工作正常,但我是惊讶地发现测试显示引用计数从未减少。我认为使用 WeakValues() 足以防止内存泄漏,但事实似乎并非如此。谁能指出是什么导致了这次泄漏?
public class SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImpl implements ISynchronousMethodExecutor {
// mutex map to provide string references
final Map<String, String> mutexMap = new MapMaker()
.weakValues()
.makeComputingMap(
new Function<String, String>() {
@Override
public String apply(String id) {
return id;
}
});
@Override
public Object doSynchronousMethod(String domain, String id, ISynchronousMethod synchronousMethod) {
synchronized(mutexMap.get(domain + "." + id))
{
return synchronousMethod.execute();
}
}
这
是在最后一个断言处失败的测试:
public class SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImplTest extends TestCase {
int counter;
SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImpl methodExecutor;
@Override
public void before() throws Exception {
super.before();
methodExecutor = new SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImpl();
}
@Test
public void concurrentExecute() throws InterruptedException {
assertEquals(0, counter);
for(int i=0; i<1000; i++)
getConcurrentExecutorThread().start();
// wait for threads to complete
Thread.sleep(1000);
assertEquals(1, methodExecutor.mutexMap.size());
try
{
final List<long[]> infiniteList = new LinkedList<long[]>();
for(long i = Long.MIN_VALUE; i < Long.MAX_VALUE; i++)
infiniteList.add(new long[102400]);
fail("An OutOfMemoryError should be thrown");
}
catch(OutOfMemoryError e)
{
}
assertEquals(2000, counter);
assertEquals(0, methodExecutor.mutexMap.size());
}
// synchronous method
private ISynchronousMethod method = new ISynchronousMethod() {
@Override
public Object execute() {
counter++;
return null;
}
};
/**
* Executes a line of code.
*
* @return Thread
*/
private Thread getConcurrentExecutorThread() {
return new Thread() {
@Override
public void run() {
methodExecutor.doSynchronousMethod("TEST", "1", method);
try
{
Thread.sleep(500);
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
}
methodExecutor.doSynchronousMethod("TEST", new String("1"), method);
}
};
}
}
最后一个断言是破坏测试的原因: assertEquals(0, methodExecutor.mutexMap.size());
I am creating an interface for executing methods concurrently, while abstracting away the synchronization details (To swap for a distributed implementation when needed). I've created a single jvm implementation that allows Strings to be used as the mutex by storing them in a map to ensure one reference is used, even if Strings of different references are passed in. The concurrency seems to work fine, however I was surprised to see that the test was showing the reference count is never decreasing. I assumed using WeakValues() would be enough to prevent memory leaks, but it seems that is not the case. Can anyone point out what could be causing this leak?
public class SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImpl implements ISynchronousMethodExecutor {
// mutex map to provide string references
final Map<String, String> mutexMap = new MapMaker()
.weakValues()
.makeComputingMap(
new Function<String, String>() {
@Override
public String apply(String id) {
return id;
}
});
@Override
public Object doSynchronousMethod(String domain, String id, ISynchronousMethod synchronousMethod) {
synchronized(mutexMap.get(domain + "." + id))
{
return synchronousMethod.execute();
}
}
}
Here is the test that is failing at the very last assertion:
public class SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImplTest extends TestCase {
int counter;
SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImpl methodExecutor;
@Override
public void before() throws Exception {
super.before();
methodExecutor = new SynchronousMethodExecutorSynchronizedImpl();
}
@Test
public void concurrentExecute() throws InterruptedException {
assertEquals(0, counter);
for(int i=0; i<1000; i++)
getConcurrentExecutorThread().start();
// wait for threads to complete
Thread.sleep(1000);
assertEquals(1, methodExecutor.mutexMap.size());
try
{
final List<long[]> infiniteList = new LinkedList<long[]>();
for(long i = Long.MIN_VALUE; i < Long.MAX_VALUE; i++)
infiniteList.add(new long[102400]);
fail("An OutOfMemoryError should be thrown");
}
catch(OutOfMemoryError e)
{
}
assertEquals(2000, counter);
assertEquals(0, methodExecutor.mutexMap.size());
}
// synchronous method
private ISynchronousMethod method = new ISynchronousMethod() {
@Override
public Object execute() {
counter++;
return null;
}
};
/**
* Executes a line of code.
*
* @return Thread
*/
private Thread getConcurrentExecutorThread() {
return new Thread() {
@Override
public void run() {
methodExecutor.doSynchronousMethod("TEST", "1", method);
try
{
Thread.sleep(500);
}
catch (InterruptedException e)
{
}
methodExecutor.doSynchronousMethod("TEST", new String("1"), method);
}
};
}
}
This last assertion is what breaks the test:
assertEquals(0, methodExecutor.mutexMap.size());
如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱,如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论,将不能在第一时间通知您!
发布评论
评论(2)
您将完全相同的
String
对象存储为键和值。关键是对对象的强引用,只要对它的强引用存在,对它的弱引用就没有意义。弱可达的定义 (此处)指出:顺便说一句,即使修正了这个问题,我也不认为你可以假设地图最后总是空的。它可能会接近于空,但我认为这就是关于它的全部内容。
You're storing the exact same
String
object as both the key and the value. The key is a strong reference to the object, and as long as a strong reference to it exists, the weak reference to it is meaningless. The definition of weakly reachable (here) states that:By the way, even with this corrected I don't think you can assume that the map will always be empty at the end. It will probably be close to empty, but I think that's all that can be said about it.
仅当 JVM 绝对需要更多内存时才会收集弱引用。
Weak references will only be collected when the JVM absolutely needs more memory.