I just had an interview, and I was asked to create a memory leak with Java.
Needless to say, I felt pretty dumb having no clue on how to eve
Here's a good way to create a true memory leak (objects inaccessible by running code but still stored in memory) in pure Java:
ClassLoader
.new byte[1000000]
), stores a strong reference to it in a static field, and then stores a reference to itself in a ThreadLocal
. Allocating the extra memory is optional (leaking the class instance is enough), but it will make the leak work that much faster.ClassLoader
it was loaded from.Due to the way ThreadLocal
is implemented in Oracle's JDK, this creates a memory leak:
Thread
has a private field threadLocals
, which actually stores the thread-local values.ThreadLocal
object, so after that ThreadLocal
object is garbage-collected, its entry is removed from the map.ThreadLocal
object that is its key, that object will neither be garbage-collected nor removed from the map as long as the thread lives.In this example, the chain of strong references looks like this:
Thread
object → threadLocals
map → instance of example class → example class → static ThreadLocal
field → ThreadLocal
object.
(The ClassLoader
doesn't really play a role in creating the leak, it just makes the leak worse because of this additional reference chain: example class → ClassLoader
→ all the classes it has loaded. It was even worse in many JVM implementations, especially prior to Java 7, because classes and ClassLoader
s were allocated straight into permgen and were never garbage-collected at all.)
A variation on this pattern is why application containers (like Tomcat) can leak memory like a sieve if you frequently redeploy applications which happen to use ThreadLocal
s that in some way point back to themselves. This can happen for a number of subtle reasons and is often hard to debug and/or fix.
Update: Since lots of people keep asking for it, here's some example code that shows this behavior in action.