Hi Stefan, you know as soon as I posted that, of course I came across details on this issue. In fact your very blog post. In all the time I've used castle, I never realised I was expected to explicitly release a transient component. By the sounds of it, I'm sure that will be the cause as I'm using windsor integration heavily and can easily repro the issue with a local stress test.
Thanks for the info Cheers, Andrew On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Stefan Sedich <[email protected]>wrote: > > Andrew, > > I have built a few simmilar sounding shop fronts, with medium load and > have not had issues with memory leaks with the app pools running solid > until their nightly reset. > > If you hit your site with a web stress testing tool do you see the > memory continue to climb until app pool reset? If this is the case it > is possible you have a memory leak. > > I would suggest getting a tool like ANTS profiler to see if you can > track down any memory leaks in your application and then go from > there. I would say from what I have seen in my apps ~200MB seems > reasonable depending on what it is doing. > > In my last project I had similar issues you describe. In my case I was > using Windsor and not releasing my components from the container when > I was done with them. In my case I decided to not release my objects > and use the NoTrackingReleasePolicy instead, as this was fine for my > needs and removed the leak that I had. > > I have blogged about this here: > > http://weblogs.asp.net/stefansedich/archive/2008/11/05/avoid-memory-leaks-when-using-windsor-and-not-releasing-objects.aspx > > > > Cheers > Stefan > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Andrew <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I've just launched an e-commerce website based on Monorail and using > > ActiveRecord. It's a replacement of a previous PHP solution and we > > have on average about 20 - 30 concurrent users at any given time. I'm > > also running an admin site in the same application pool. > > > > My issue is to do with memory usage. I'm running on a 1GB VPS box > > (also hosting a SQL Server DB on same machine). I've limited SQL > > Server to 200MB and my IIS6 worker process to 400MB. However, even pre- > > release when testing with 1 or 2 users the memory usage would easily > > sit around the 300MB mark. Now with the real load, I'm seeing the > > application pool recycle approx every 40 mins (normally should only > > recycle at 3am). I'm using the ASP.Net state service so session > > details are preserved but still, I'm concerned > > > > As I said, it's an e-commerce site so there's the usual shop stuff: > > lots of nice pics, searches, checkout and a bit of 2nd level caching > > for things such as categories (max 200 categories), countries, rates > > etc. Really not that much is cached and mem usage was high before we > > fully optimised the site. I've been careful to have the SQL profiler > > beside me as we were testing the app, so I'm confident that I don't > > have N+1s all over the place. Oh, and I'm using standard session-per- > > request model using Ayende's UOW stuff > > > > I guess what I'm asking is: Is that level of memory usage expected > > for that type of site? I would love to hear back from anyone who has > > launched a similar type of site. > > > > I did see a previous post about this, but they are talking around the > > 200MB mark, so I'm wondering what on earth I'm doing wrong! > > > > There is the option of shelling out more cash and go to a 2GB VPS box, > > but I'd rather not have to.... > > > > cheers > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Stefan Sedich > Software Developer > http://weblogs.asp.net/stefansedich > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
