- Finalizers are dangerous
Re: Finalizers are dangerous
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I have just submitted a change which should resolve this issue, but worth a check in your code to verify it has fixed the issue for your use case. It's in the "next" branch.
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Frank Quinn <frank@...>
Sure sounds good, though these are MAMA bridge level configurations so let's make it:
The destructor / finalizer approach will fix the GC problem just fine for C# / Java. What is being described there is effectively a bug in those methods. What it won't solve is applications deliberately accessing MAMA payload and middleware methods after close and expecting it to actually function with new messages, iterators etc. However it would certainly stop GC after close from crashing the jvm which sounds like it is Yury's main issue.
As much as I would love to just mandate that all Java and C# developers call destroy on all of the objects (it would make my life a lot easier), a lot of developers we have worked with in the past simply don't accept that as a solution for a GC based runtime which is why we need all this finalizer fun to play nicely.
Join Openmamaemail@example.com to automatically receive all group messages.