fix:Reclaim the heartbeat response message to avoid memory leakage of GettyRemoting.futures #665
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
luky116
changed the title
wt-better
reviewed
Mar 16, 2024
| @@ -38,5 +38,9 @@ func (f *clientHeartBeatProcessor) Process(ctx context.Context, rpcMessage messa | |||
| log.Debug("received PONG from {}", ctx) | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| msgFuture := getty.GetGettyRemotingInstance().GetMessageFuture(rpcMessage.ID) | |||
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does:
Reclaim the heartbeat response message to avoid memory leakage of GettyRemoting.futures
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
NONE
Special notes for your reviewer:
When sending a message, in GettyRemoting.futures, added a new records, but in dealing with a heartbeat message receipt, no call GettyRemoting.RemoveMessageFuture method, This leads to an increasing amount of data in GettyRemoting.futures, which eventually leads to oom
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
NONE