[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-37?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13949375#comment-13949375
]
Pavel Moravec commented on DISPATCH-37:
---------------------------------------
Another particular leak: when sending messages (coming from to a local mobile
subscriber:
==9009== 47,712 (96 direct, 47,616 indirect) bytes in 3 blocks are definitely
lost in loss record 2,617 of 2,619
==9009== at 0x4A06409: malloc (in
/usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==9009== by 0x4C1FD6E: qd_alloc (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C2142B: new_qd_composed_field_t (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C21D01: qd_compose (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C2C420: qd_python_send (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DDCED: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4098)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DD80B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4184)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DD80B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4184)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DEC7C: PyEval_EvalCodeEx (ceval.c:3330)
==9009== by 0x3D6D26DC9F: function_call (funcobject.c:526)
==9009== by 0x3D6D249DD2: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)
==9009== by 0x3D6D258554: instancemethod_call (classobject.c:2602)
==9009== 33,120 (96 direct, 33,024 indirect) bytes in 3 blocks are definitely
lost in loss record 2,611 of 2,619
==9009== at 0x4A06409: malloc (in
/usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==9009== by 0x4C1FD6E: qd_alloc (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C20E2D: new_qd_bitmask_t (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C20E98: qd_bitmask (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C32510: qd_router_send (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C327AF: qd_router_send2 (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C2C5A9: qd_python_send (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DDCED: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4098)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DD80B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4184)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DD80B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4184)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DEC7C: PyEval_EvalCodeEx (ceval.c:3330)
==9009== by 0x3D6D26DC9F: function_call (funcobject.c:526)
==9009== 8,480 (32 direct, 8,448 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely
lost in loss record 2,557 of 2,619
==9009== at 0x4A06409: malloc (in
/usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==9009== by 0x4C1FD6E: qd_alloc (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C26A8D: new_qd_field_iterator_t (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C2702B: qd_field_iterator_string (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C32794: qd_router_send2 (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C2C5A9: qd_python_send (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DDCED: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4098)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DD80B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4184)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DD80B: PyEval_EvalFrameEx (ceval.c:4184)
==9009== by 0x3D6D2DEC7C: PyEval_EvalCodeEx (ceval.c:3330)
==9009== by 0x3D6D26DC9F: function_call (funcobject.c:526)
==9009== by 0x3D6D249DD2: PyObject_Call (abstract.c:2529)
==9009== 1,080 bytes in 18 blocks are possibly lost in loss record 2,312 of
2,619
==9009== at 0x4A06409: malloc (in
/usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==9009== by 0x4C201BC: qd_alloc (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C27E59: new_qd_message_t (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C28E15: qd_message (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C29451: qd_message_receive (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C2FA0A: router_rx_handler (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C23A57: do_receive (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C23D2C: process_handler (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C2407A: handler (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C35103: process_connector (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x4C35662: thread_run (in
/home/pmoravec/dispatch-trunk/trunk/BLD/libqpid-dispatch.so.0.1)
==9009== by 0x3D6B607C52: start_thread (pthread_create.c:308)
> Various memory leaks
> --------------------
>
> Key: DISPATCH-37
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-37
> Project: Qpid Dispatch
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Container
> Affects Versions: 0.1
> Reporter: Pavel Moravec
> Attachments: out01.log
>
>
> Valgrind reports various memory leaks after very basic usage of Dispatch
> router. For basic scenario, have 2 routers A<->B and send messages from
> bouncing producer connected to A to a bouncing consumer connected to B.
> Attached is valgrind output for that.
> Some particular memory leaks to be commented later on.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
