(node) warning: possible EventEmitter memory leak detected. 11 listeners added. Use emitter.setMaxListeners() to increase limit.
Trace
at EventEmitter.logPossibleMemoryLeak (/usr/src/app/node_modules/eventemitter2/lib/eventemitter2.js:53:15)
at EventEmitter.growListenerTree (/usr/src/app/node_modules/eventemitter2/lib/eventemitter2.js:218:35)
at EventEmitter.on (/usr/src/app/node_modules/eventemitter2/lib/eventemitter2.js:492:24)
at EventEmitter.many (/usr/src/app/node_modules/eventemitter2/lib/eventemitter2.js:269:10)
at EventEmitter.once (/usr/src/app/node_modules/eventemitter2/lib/eventemitter2.js:249:10)
at sub (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express-longpoll/index.js:135:36)
at _app.get (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express-longpoll/index.js:142:21)
at Layer.handle [as handle_request] (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/layer.js:95:5)
at next (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/route.js:137:13)
at middleware (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express-longpoll/index.js:106:50)
at Layer.handle [as handle_request] (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/layer.js:95:5)
at next (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/route.js:137:13)
at Route.dispatch (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/route.js:112:3)
at Layer.handle [as handle_request] (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/layer.js:95:5)
at /usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:281:22
at Function.process_params (/usr/src/app/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:335:12
It happens to me in every project, even in very small demo project, therefore I think that someone else must have seen this, too? Any ideas how to fix this?
It might not be the fundamental solution you're looking for, but creating the polling endpoint with longpoll.create("/poll", { maxListeners: <number> }); does seem to increase the limit.
Version
0.0.6
generates the following warning:These are my
package.json
dependencies:Node version:
Running in docker using this image:
node:10.22
It happens to me in every project, even in very small demo project, therefore I think that someone else must have seen this, too? Any ideas how to fix this?