Leaked | Checking tool for Hash codes | Email library

I'm runnning a cluster in Kubernetes with minikube and VirtualBox.

This is my headless service

After noticing an odd memory behavior in task manager in one of my applications I started investigating memory leaks with FastMM4. I found more than 1000 just after opening three forms. I hope I will be able to find the cause in a single place

In one case, even if always free the TStringList in the finally block (that is always reached), FastMM4 reports a memory leak:

I want to discuss wether good or bad idea:

I got a MySQL DB and created a common table "user" to authenticate an login.

I use CMake in my C++ project for a while, and my project is an application (not a library) consisting of multiple sub modules, where each module depends on other internal modules in the same project, and depends on multiple third party libraries as well, and each of them is built using CMake.

Currently, we use PUBLIC in target_link_libraries when specifying these dependencies. I read some articles/documentations [1][2][3] about this topic, and know the general difference between PUBLIC/INTERFACE/PRIVATE, and know that it is recommended to specify different visibility as detailed as possible. But since I am building an application but not a library, I am not worried that internal APIs are "leaked" accidentally, is there any other benefit that we should choose to use non PUBLIC visibility like PRIVATE? For example, besides affecting linking's speed, does it affect compilation speed? If linking doesn't take too much time, does it still make sense to optimize compilation speed by exploring this option? Does it affect the size of the binary in the end? Or is there any other benefit for controlling this behavior? Thanks.

[1] https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/command/target_link_libraries.html [2] https://leimao.github.io/blog/CMake-Public-Private-Interface/ [3] https://cmake.org/pipermail/cmake/2016-May/063400.html

We want to display customer (actually customer-group) specific information on product detail pages in Shopware 6.

There seems to be the HTTP cache and we are afraid that the page would be cached if a specific customer group displays the page and the information would be leaked to non-customers.

Is this assumption correct?

The documentation does not reveal much information about this.

Is there a way to set specific cache tags, so that the information is only displayed to the correct customer group?

Or do we need to fetch the data dynamically via AJAX?

Bonus question: Can the HTTP cache be simulated in automatic tests to ensure the functionality works?

What I found out so far:

• The is annotation @httpCache for controller, which seems to control whether a page is cached or not

• The cache key is generated in \Shopware\Storefront\Framework\Cache\HttpCacheKeyGenerator::generate. It take the full request URI into account, and some cacheHash which is injected. I believe it would not take the customer group into account

• Maybe this generate() method could be decorated, but I am not sure if that is the right way.

• There is a cookie being set sw-cache-hash which influences the caching. It takes the customer into account.

• sw-cache-hash is created here:

  ...

Trying to mimic a scenario where multiple threads are creating the traffic to fill the buckets & a thread which leaks the bucket a specified rate. However,code is running into deadlock. Could you pl review this code ? Let me know if you see any errors & best possible modifications that I should add.

Code

consider this code:
EXAMPLE A:

My first question is that the object A(v) that added the the map, it should be deleted automatically when exit the scope?

My second question is what would happen to the object added into the map, when program exits? I believe when I do a_[name] = A(v);, a copy is stored to the map. Also, do I need to provide a copy constructor?

We have a Web API (.NET Core 5) which passes the request on to another remote Web API.

The Web API grabs some cookies from the incoming request and appends them to the outgoing request.

Normally this works fine and we see the request cookies arriving at the remote Web API.

But when multiple requests are sent simultaneously, the cookies from one incoming request are somehow leaking over into the outgoing request of another.

This even happens when using totally separate users and totally separate browsers.

Things I've tried and confirmed:

• The code which copies the cookies from incoming request to outgoing request works perfectly fine. In fact even when the cookies appearing on the remote API are "leaked", my custom logging suggests it still worked as expected

• I can see the expected/leaky request cookie on the remote Web API (in its raw IIS logs), so it can't be the remote API adding it to the request in its pipeline.

• Added logging to the HttpClient call but can't see the unexpected cookies being sent.

• This doesn't happen locally

• My feeling is something is happening in HttpClient somehow??

• UPDATE 1 I added logging to CopyCookieHandler and it only gets created once and reused by all requests

• UPDATE 2 I just read that HttpMessageHandler instances results in CookieContainer objects being shared...which may possible explain this... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/fundamentals/http-requests?view=aspnetcore-5.0#cookies

The first API has this setup to use HttpClient: