I just re-ran your test with the latest, correct! change for MLT_USE_POOL,
and RES usage did not exceed 370 MiB
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 4:55 PM Dan Dennedy <d...@dennedy.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:13 PM Kingsley G. Morse Jr. <kings...@loaner.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> Thank you very much for freely sharing your time,
>> skills and software.
>>
>> I can imagine mlt becoming even more popular.
>>
>> The main reason I'm writing is I happened to
>> notice a plan to use mlt_pool by default.
>>
>> Maybe you remember it resulted in a large,
>> wasteful memory footprint back in March.
>>
>> (That email follows.)
>>
>>
> The biggest improvement in memory reduction from your case came from the
> change in the affine transition:
>
> https://github.com/mltframework/mlt/commit/e426a4ed62c7f674db4498766d6928a9598a7ca9
>
>
>
>> You very reasonably and responsibly anticipated
>> more testing.
>>
>> Humble suggestion:
>>
>> Use my little kdenlive project to test if mlt_pool
>> still uses too much memory.
>>
>> All my files are at
>>
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=890848
>>
>> I'd like to avoid a regression.
>>
>>
> The change to stop using mlt_pool is causing stability regressions, which
> is less desirable than the memory saving it provides.
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Kingsley
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Mlt-devel mailing list
Mlt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mlt-devel
