On Jun 12, 4:43 am, Graham Dumpleton <graham.dumple...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 11:51 am, Miles <boo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If someone has an idea how to get memory usage at about the same with > > lower cpu cost than a full GC every request, please tell. > > In Python, garbage collecting is not real garbage collection like > other systems. Primarily, Python uses reference counting on objects > and so is able to reclaim memory as soon as last reference is gone. > The problem, and where GC kicks in in Python, is where there are > object reference count loops. That is, where a network of objects have > mutual references to each other. > > If you can, perhaps try and determine what objects it is that the GC > is having to deal with. In some cases the design of objects can be > changed to avoid the GC needing to kick in to reclaim them. > > Graham
Almost everything refers to and from a certain page variable, which contains the state of the whole page, with lists to in memory and database objects. Page: contains a list of actors (read: players / creatures). Contains many other variables, like current report (read: url). Actor: contains a reference to page, so actor.link() knows where to point the a href to. And that's the case for many other objects, basically anything that needs to dereference some id to an object. We could rewrite everything from OO to page.actor_get_link(actor), but in templates where the convention for tags / macros (jinja2 \o/) is only pass what it really needs to know, passing page around on every call will make the code really ugly to work with. Unrelated: I found out about gc.set_debug(gc.DEBUG_STATS); It's pretty useful, but: 1. What's the idea of printing time.time() to stderr like 3 million times. And elapsed. It does that for every ref cleared?! 2. Auto collect triggers gen 2 collection frequently, live object count is exactly the same as manual collection, but memory used doesn't drop. Weird. Sample line: [Fri Jun 12 04:20:07 2009] [error] gc: done, 8193 unreachable, 0 uncollectable. 3. gc.gc() gives 8193 as well, but it *does* get the RSS down to acceptable levels. Bug? I've glanced around in gcmodule.c casually, but couldn't find anything wrong with that. It might be some weird interaction with other code, but as a complete newbie to Python internals, I probably can't track that down. Miles --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
