On Mar 23, 2:02 am, Graham Dumpleton <graham.dumple...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 2009/3/23 gert <gert.cuyk...@gmail.com>:
>
> > wsgi r1232 python 3.1 apache 2.2.11
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME
COMMAND
> > www 29747 0.0 0.8 229496 4160 ? Sl 01:35 0:00
> > (wsgi:site1) -k start
> > www 29776 0.0 0.8 8268 4040 ? S 01:35 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 29777 0.0 0.8 8268 4032 ? S 01:35 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 29778 0.0 0.8 8268 4032 ? S 01:35 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 29779 0.0 0.8 8268 4032 ? S 01:35 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 29780 0.0 0.8 8268 4032 ? S 01:35 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
>
> > x20 apache2ctl restart
>
> > www 30550 0.0 1.3 231432 6352 ? Sl 01:36 0:00
> > (wsgi:site1) -k start
> > www 30579 0.0 1.3 10204 6192 ? S 01:36 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 30580 0.0 1.3 10204 6184 ? S 01:36 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 30581 0.0 1.3 10204 6184 ? S 01:36 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 30582 0.0 1.3 10204 6184 ? S 01:36 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
> > www 30583 0.0 1.3 10204 6184 ? S 01:36 0:00 /usr/
> > httpd/bin/httpd -k start
>
> Looking into my crystal ball I assume that you are possibly pointing
> out that memory is still being leaked.
>
> Even though that issue addresses a larger source of memory leakage,
> the Python interpreter itself still leaks memory when Py_Finalize() is
> called.
>
> I actually find the comment by Mark Hammond in:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_frm/thread/7b8...
>
> quite disturbing. Namely:
>
> """Calling
> Py_Initialize and Py_Finalize multiple times does leak (Python 3 has
> mechanisms so this need to always be true in the future, but it is true
> now for non-trivial apps."""
>
> Unfortunately his grammar is a bit unclear and so not 100% sure what
> he meant. Not sure if what he meant to say is that Python 3 will
> always have memory leaks, or that it shouldn't, whereas older versions
> of Python can.
>
> If by design Python 3.0 is now going to never properly clean up its
> memory on exit, then we are all screwed and embedded mode will be
> useless and may as well be removed, as well as mod_python also dying
> for good. This means that mod_wsgid as described in mod_wsgi roadmap
> will be the only viable way of running Python under Apache in the
> future.
>
> I'll see if I can get Mark to clarify what he meant.
Note that (wsgi:site1) witch is the daemon process, increases exactly
the same the 5 embedded processes
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"modwsgi" group.
To post to this group, send email to modwsgi@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
modwsgi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/modwsgi?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
