On Aug 26, 2006, at 5:12 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > in any case, i'd carefully examine your tests (or the rails code if > that is > indeed what it's modeled after) to make sure that they test > Mutex/Sync/Thread/Ruby and not your os virtual memory system and > look closely > at the results again - like i said, i have had issues with sync.rb. > > the point here is that it is probably the code in question and not > Mutex per > se that was causing your process to grow in vmsize. >
I ran your test on OS/X looking at VSZ and RSS. And, like you, initially got Sync with no leak visible, and mutex with what looks like a bad leak. However, I notice that you only called GC once. I have a years old habit of always running GC at least three times when I really wanted GC to run (and in Java I had a loop that ran GC until it stopped freeing stuff which in some cases was eight or nine times). Superstition? Apparently not. On OS X, when I run GC three times neither sync nor mutex show a memory leak. Zed, just for fun, try running GC a few times in a row (like GC.start; GC.start; GC.start) . Cheers, Bob ---- Bob Hutchison -- blogs at <http://www.recursive.ca/ hutch/> Recursive Design Inc. -- <http://www.recursive.ca/> Raconteur -- <http://www.raconteur.info/> xampl for Ruby -- <http://rubyforge.org/projects/xampl/> _______________________________________________ Mongrel-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
