In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi! I'm the original poster about the possible memory leak issue, and I just wanted to clarify a few things in response to the other posts on this topic. I hope this message gets posted in the right thread...Problems with internal mail have kept me from receiving the list messages, so I can't actually "reply" to the thread.
In response to Richard's post: > When I run DX on a remote machine (SGI Irix 6.5 with OpenDX in the most recent case) > through an X window on my local SGI (with setenv DISPLAY) I have noticed that the Xsgi > process on my local machine (owned by root) grows and grows with every use of DX until > memory is exceeded and very bad things happen (X dies and sometimes the whole > machine dies). An interesting problem, to say the least, but I think what I'm seeing is more of an OpenDX memory-management issue than a system-level problem. When OpenDX "crashes" in this case, it only runs up against the dxexec memory limit (-memory 200) and doesn't free any of that up, so the network won't run. This is not a case of any single image being too large to run in memory, but a problem that compounds with each network execution. It's never crashed X or my machine...just bumped up against OpenDX's internal memory limit. Only takes a disconnect/reconnect server (not reset server) in OpenDX to free up the memory. In response to Ballard's post: > I don't have the seed email but was this user trying to import a lengthy file series using > the Sequencer? Nope. Just one file, using the sequencer to select data at different time-steps out of the file. In response to Suhaib's post: > The OpenDx/Cygwin version Windows 98? That is a known problem. You > have right to yell at M$ for selling the gloriously shitty product. > Win98 itself has memory leak, which gets horrible when an > X-application (X-server) is running because Win98 tries to be selfish > and hat to share > resources with any other server... With X-server trying to share > Display causes Win98/95 to start eating CPU resources and may once > in a while will force you to reboot the PC..... because it gets > horribly slow. Actually, I was able to create the problem under NT as well. The problem is not with CPU resources, but memory usage. It seems like OpenDx isn't releasing memory somewhere, so eventually it fills up its memory limit (-memory 200) and won't release any of it. Nothing effects the system, except the dx network won't run until you disconnect/reconnect the dxexec to force the release of memory. Thanks for the responses! Let's keep at it so we can figure out what's going on here... Jeremy Zoss Southwest Research Institute (210)522-3089 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
