garbage-collection

问题 I am using Instance as a lazy / dynamic injector in a TomEE Java application, and I have noticed a memory leak in my application. This is a first for me, so it's actually surprising to see a memory leak warning that has been outlined in the Java EE Library : package javax.enterprise.inject; public interface Instance<T> extends Iterable<T>, Provider<T> { /** * Destroy the given Contextual Instance. * This is especially intended for {@link javax.enterprise.context.Dependent} scoped beans *

问题 I am using Instance as a lazy / dynamic injector in a TomEE Java application, and I have noticed a memory leak in my application. This is a first for me, so it's actually surprising to see a memory leak warning that has been outlined in the Java EE Library : package javax.enterprise.inject; public interface Instance<T> extends Iterable<T>, Provider<T> { /** * Destroy the given Contextual Instance. * This is especially intended for {@link javax.enterprise.context.Dependent} scoped beans *

问题 This question already has answers here : Does the CLR garbage collection methodology mean it's safe to throw circular object references around? (2 answers) Closed 26 days ago . There are two scenario that i trying to understand how will GC will act 1- There is two object - object1 and object2 object1 has reference on object2 and object2 has reference on object1 Now, both of those object are not in use and GC can collect them. What will happened ? does GC skip on this collection ? ? 2- Same

问题 I run into problems when calling Spark's MinHashLSH's approxSimilarityJoin on a dataframe of (name_id, name) combinations. A summary of the problem I try to solve: I have a dataframe of around 30 million unique (name_id, name) combinations for company names. Some of those names refer to the same company, but are (i) either misspelled, and/or (ii) include additional names. Performing fuzzy string matching for every combination is not possible. To reduce the number of fuzzy string matching

问题 I am using the dotMemoryUnit to prove the my DbContext object is getting garbage collected properly. I feel that this code should work properly in a unit test, but the test always fails. The only thing I can guess is EF Core is holding a reference somewhere. Edit: I'm not sure the suggested question addresses this problem as this is .Net Core and not .Net Framework. The documentation for GC.Collect()'s default is forced and the documentation says nothing about hints. Edit 2: I did find the

问题 I read an article about C# and performance considerations (here) In the article, it is said that a delegate assignment triggers memory allocations, e.g: every single local variable assignment like "Func fn = Fn" creates a new instance of the delegate class Func on the heap I wanted to know if that is true, and if it is - how is that implemented? i am not familiar with any way that a reference assignment can trigger extra memory allocation in C#. 回答1: The article is right. Quite easy to test:

问题 I've ready many posts on how to connect multiple signals to the same event handler in python and pyqt. For example, connecting several buttons or comboboxes to the same function. Many examples show how to do this with QSignalMapper, but it is not applicable when the signal carries a parameter, as with combobox.currentIndexChanged Many people suggest it can be made with lambda. It is a clean and pretty solution, I agree, but nobody mentions that lambda creates a closure, which holds a

问题 I've ready many posts on how to connect multiple signals to the same event handler in python and pyqt. For example, connecting several buttons or comboboxes to the same function. Many examples show how to do this with QSignalMapper, but it is not applicable when the signal carries a parameter, as with combobox.currentIndexChanged Many people suggest it can be made with lambda. It is a clean and pretty solution, I agree, but nobody mentions that lambda creates a closure, which holds a

问题 This question already has answers here : Finalize vs Dispose (15 answers) Closed 6 years ago . I've been hearing advices about putting codes to handle unmanaged resources in both finalizer and Dispose() method. What I don't understand is that since finalizers are called when GC occurs so we could technically assume that it gets called all the time. In that case why bother disposing an object? Am I missing something? 回答1: In that case why bother disposing an object? Because you don't have

问题 This question already has answers here : Finalize vs Dispose (15 answers) Closed 6 years ago . I've been hearing advices about putting codes to handle unmanaged resources in both finalizer and Dispose() method. What I don't understand is that since finalizers are called when GC occurs so we could technically assume that it gets called all the time. In that case why bother disposing an object? Am I missing something? 回答1: In that case why bother disposing an object? Because you don't have