Servlet instances leak custodian-managed resources
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Racket
- Stars
- 99
- Forks
- 48
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
When servlet instances are flushed (selectively or not), the only action taken is that servlet instance references are discarded. In particular, resources managed by the servlet custodian are not shut down but are instead managed (directly) by the superordinate custodian.
Should the servlet custodian be shut down when the instance is flushed?
For my use case (spawning a service thread), it looks like I can get by with a will, but shutting down the custodian seems like a more “natural” general policy. (And maybe it is, but is also a breaking change. Is that the case?)
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the issue discussion about servlet flushing, custodian-managed resources, and the proposed shutdown policy. Trace the servlet instance flush path and custodian lifecycle, then determine and document the intended cleanup behavior, including whether existing use cases would be affected.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- backend
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100