true ... but by that definition you would expect windows programs to release memory by
default... and the OS should handle it .. right?
Which it doesn't.... it's not just DynAPI pages that swallow memory, ordinary pages do
to...
and so do many windows programs.
(But... this is assuming that windows is actually a good OS... which it is... NOT)
Taking this into account... you have to work with the conditions at hand...
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: Pascal Bestebroer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Till: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Datum: den 16 februari 2001 20:15
Ämne: RE: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
>to be even less helpful here, I truly believe it can't be fixed, and that
>it's an browser issue..
>I truly hope I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the javascript interpreters
>should automatically unload any memory no matter what.
>This is how all (good) environments work) they get space to work in, and
>once it's done that single memory block is freed.
>
>Maybe I'm wrong (and I truly hope so) but I won't be searching for a
>solution on this.
>
>Pascal Bestebroer
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.dynamic-core.net
>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Namens Michael Ellis
>> Verzonden: vrijdag 16 februari 2001 19:25
>> Aan: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
>> Onderwerp: RE: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
>>
>>
>> I agree... this is a huge problem. Pretty much makes the software unusable
>> unless you have a ton of ram.
>>
>> I currently have a level-3 defect on the memory leak generated by
>> DynAPI for
>> a software product that is supposed to be out the door in a week. We have
>> not successfully had any impact whatsoever on this issue to date.
>>
>> Anyone had any luck with this? Anyone have any ideas?
>>
>> Mike Ellis
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lasse Lindgård [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 07:00
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: RE: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
>>
>>
>> More importantly than upfront performance:
>> Does it reduce the memory leak ?
>>
>> If not then performance will be on a freight train to swap-land in no time
>> anyways.
>>
>> My current DynAPI pages eat a meg or more pr. reload. It is not a big
>> problem at my 256mb machine. But just the thoughts of my clients 32mb
>> machines makes me shiver.
>>
>> Any news on the memoryleak front ?
>> Is anybody working on it at all or are everybody busy doing "cool" stuff
>> instead ?
>>
>> For DynAPI ever to be useful. We really need to get that memory problem
>> fixed.
>>
>> /Lasse
>>
>>
>> -- __--__--
>>
>> Message: 6
>> From: "Eytan Heidingsfeld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "Dynapi-Dev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:18:56 +0200
>> Subject: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
>> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>>
>> ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C09823.65DE2AF0
>> Content-Type: text/plain;
>> charset="iso-8859-1"
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>
>> I'd love to test performance one against the other. The only test
>> I did was
>> create 100 layers and check the times. In IE TCanvas was 200 ms faster and
>> in NS it was 1300(canvas) to 10000(dynlayer).
>>
>> I'd love you guys to start tearing my canvas to shreds.
>>
>> Included in the zip are:
>> tcanvas.js
>> browser.js
>>
>> they need to be included in the document(working on adding .include)
>>
>> 8an
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dynapi-Dev mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Dynapi-Dev mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Dynapi-Dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
