Hi,
I am using IG Version 10.3.20103.1003. I can notice the usercontrol which I am placing inside the XamContentPane is not disposing on close & with every close & open on ContentPane I can see the memory going up because the View inside the ContentPane is not disposing.
I am setting
AllowClose="True" CloseAction="RemovePane"
Also the usercontrol which I am using have a simple ListView.
Can any one please suggest any solution? Or is it a bug? I am using Windows 7 as client environment.
Hello,
Have you had a chance to create a sample that we could debug, as per Andrew's reply?
Thanks,
Sorry for delay,
I had created a standalone sample with XamDockManager & XamTabPane but it worked fine for me (means with the closing of tab GC is disposing the instance). Then I figure out that the problem is actually when you use TabGroupPane with Prism 4.0. In this case even if I am unsubscribing all the events from the view while closing, one instance of view (ContenttPane) is always present (event if GC cycle is completed).
So scenario is like this:
You make TabgroupPane a region in Shell & add multiple ContenttPane (Views) targeting to same region (Remember each view will have its viewModel & model). Now close all the views (Unsubscribe all the events on close) & trigger the GC. You will get one View instance is always present even if the ViewModel & Model corresponding to the view are disposed.
In my case this is not a big problem as the ViewModel & Model are disposed so this instance of view is not creating any memory leak. But ideally all the view instances should be disposed when you close the contentPane.
I don’t have a standalone solution (with Prism 4.0) for this to show. But if you really want see you can create one with prism 4.0 & TabGroupPane. (I am using the default adapters provided by Prism.)
Not being very adept with Prism myself, the one Prism example I have available is attached. I believe it is using the XamDockManager and Prism v4.0, so it may be a decent candidate to start with. If you can modify this sample so that it demonstrates the issue, please reply with the new sample and we will look into it.
Hi again,
Were you able to modify the sample to reproduce the issue?