Yea, I was worried about negative effects of this also. You don't get
something for nothing, right? The only mention I've seen so far is a comment
from hammett in the another post to this group ("ViewComponent memory
leak"):"The side effects is that you might have disposable components that are not being disposed by the container" In my case I know I don't have any disposable components involved, so after some proper testing, I'll be applying the 'fix' to my server On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Stefan Sedich <[email protected]>wrote: > > Excellent glad I could help. But I would look into releasing your > objects properly, not sure maybe someone can comment on negative > impacts of using NoTrack policy. > > > > Cheers > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Andrew Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > just changed the policy and re-ran a local stress test. Immediate > > improvement. Previous test ended with memory usage of ~200MB, this time > > round 70MB > > thanks again! > > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Stefan Sedich <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> No problems, > >> > >> Something that caught me too, I knew a few people that were not aware > >> and they had never stress tested their apps or realised it was > >> resetting (dangerous). I am glad I profile my stuff before putting it > >> anywhere near production. I guess releasing is the way proper way to > >> handle things, but I have been naughty and just used NoTracking. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Andrew Smith <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > 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 > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Stefan Sedich > >> Software Developer > >> http://weblogs.asp.net/stefansedich > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
