Mmm, yes, it appears that the memory is not properly freed. I can try experimenting by destroying the dom element and recreating it each time that the plot changes...
Btw., instead of continuing here "polluting" the pypy-dev mailing list, we can move to http://groups.google.com/group/codespeed if needed. Thanks for reporting this. Cheers, Miquel 2010/12/22 Dima Tisnek <[email protected]>: > I sort of figured it out, although I don't have a ready solution. > > This affects opera 11, stable ff, ff 4.0b7; amazingly it does not affect ie8. > Basically memory consumption of the plot appears to be proportional to > plot area. > Normal plot that you get by default at > http://speed.pypy.org/comparison/ costs about 100M of browser memory > consumption: > opera 130M, stable ff 70M, beta ff 90M at window size 1680x1050; > opera 80M, stable ff 55M, beta ff 70M at window size 1024x600; > Switching to "horizontal" produces a tall plot of same width and costs > about 300~700M of browser memory: > opera 720M, stable ff 370M, beta ff 370M at window wize 1680x1050; > opera 350M, stable ff 370M, beta ff 370M at window size 1024x600; > > Suprisingly window size only matters while javascript produces the > plot, and not when window is resized, even though plot it resized with > the window correctly. > > This alone is pretty heavy, but doesn't grind the browser. > What really grinds is that every time you change a tickbox on the > left, a plot is redrawn and another 200M of browser memory is wasted. > This is not double buffering, as next change adds yet another 200M or > so and so on, it appears that either js doesn't free something, or > browser caches or saves the previous page state. > > As memory consumption grows, at some point browser hits the wall, > causes heavy swapping for some time, and I think garbage collection, > because practical (but not virtual) memory usage first drops to > something like 20~50M and then returns to "normal" 300M. > opera ~30 seconds, stable ff about a minute, beta ff several minutes > (total system mem 1G, cpu Atom @1.6GHz) > > Perhaps OS also plays a role in the grind, as it is clearly swapping > and swaps out too much? or triggers gc too late and gc has to pull the > pages back from disk to perform collection? > > ie8 doesn't use that much memory, as a matter of fact memory > consumption starts little (40M) and changes very little (only +10M) if > you go to horizonatal view; the price is very slow rendering, more > than 10 seconds per column change. > > I'll post this on firefox bugzilla too, let's see if someone has a solution. > > Meanwhile perhaps pypy speed center could start with a smaller plot > area (or fewer columns as that makes horizontal plot smaller) to > accomodate varying hardware and system mem usage that users might > have? > The simplest would be a warning next to "horizontal" checkbox. > > On 21 December 2010 01:06, Miquel Torres <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Dima, >> >>> another temp problem with speed pypy is that it's terrubly slow in ff >>> beta. it also occasionally grinds in stable ff and opera, but I guess >>> this can be forgiven for the sake of simplicity / developer effort. >> >> Well, speed.pypy is actually fast in all modern browsers. The problem >> you are referring to is probably caused by a bug in the javascript >> plotting library (jqPplot) that is triggered in the comparison view >> when there are some results with 0 values. It only appears for some >> plot types, but it is very annoying because it grinds the browser to a >> halt like you say. Is that what you meant? >> >> We are looking into it, and will fix that library if necessary. >> >> Cheers, >> Miquel >> >> >> 2010/12/21 Dima Tisnek <[email protected]>: >>> On 20 December 2010 19:21, William ML Leslie >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 21 December 2010 11:59, Dima Tisnek <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> More visibility for performance achievements would do >>>>> good too. >>>> >>>> Where are pypy's performance achievements *not* visible, but should be? >>> >>> for example http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ >>> doesn't say which pypy version is used, what options, doesn't have >>> performance figures for multithreaded/multicore >>> >>> also benchmarks are kinda small, most of them are not docuemented, and >>> I couldn't find any info if the same python code was used for cpython >>> and pypy (both shootout and speed pypy) or interpreter-specific >>> verions were used, that is each tweaked for best performance given the >>> known tradeoffs for each implementation.further the most standard >>> benchmarks, pystone, etc. completely ignore the fact that real world >>> programs are large and only a few small paths are execured often. >>> >>> another temp problem with speed pypy is that it's terrubly slow in ff >>> beta. it also occasionally grinds in stable ff and opera, but I guess >>> this can be forgiven for the sake of simplicity / developer effort. >>> >>> if you google for 'python performance' you don't get a single link to >>> pypy on the first page, as a matter of fact, codespeak is poorly >>> indexed, it took me quite some time to get some of my questions >>> answered with a search. also if you look up 'pypy gc' you get a page >>> on codespeak, but to interpret what the data actually means is so far >>> beyond me. >>> >>> a good overview is found in the mainling list >>> http://codespeak.net/pipermail/pypy-dev/2010q1/005757.html then again >>> slowspitfire and spambayes bits are outdated by now. >>> >>> the definitive good thing about pypy is that it's much easier to find >>> out about its inner workings than that of cpython! >>> >>> hopefully a bit more of end-user stuff get known. >>> let's call it pypy public outreach (feature request) >>> >>>> >>>>> Sidetracking... one day when pypy jit/gc/etc are all worked out, how >>>>> hard would it be to use same techniques and most of backends for some >>>>> unrelated language that doesn't have jit yet, e.g. php? >>>> >>>> You know that pypy already has implementations of other languages, >>>> right - Scheme, Javascript, Prolog, IO and smallTalk? They aren't >>>> integrated with the translated pypy-c, but they show that it is not >>>> too difficult to write a runtime for any dynamic language you choose. >>> >>> Oh I didn't know there were so many, and I mistakenly though that js >>> was a target, not implmented langauge. In any case I read somewhere >>> that js support was retired... >>> >>>> >>>>> And how hard >>>>> would it be to marry two dynamic languages, so that modules from one >>>>> could be used in the other? Or that modules written in rpython could >>>>> be used in several langs? >>>> >>>> It's in the "interesting problems" bucket, and the effort required >>>> depends on the level of integration between languages you want. There >>>> are several projects already attempting to do decent integration >>>> between several languages, besides the approach used on the JVM, there >>>> are also GNU Guile, Racket, and Parrot, among others. It might be >>>> worth waiting to see how these different projects pan out, before >>>> spending a bunch of effort just to be an also-ran in the >>>> multi-language runtime market. >>>> >>>> However, implementing more languages in rpython has the side-effect of >>>> propagating the l * o * p problem: it introduces more and more >>>> implementations that then have to be maintained, so good >>>> cross-language integration probably belongs /outside/ pypy itself, so >>>> existing runtimes can hook into it. >>> >>> Makes perfect sense, after all any given other language hardly has the >>> same data model as python. >>> >>>> >>>> But it would be an interesting experiment (to marry the various >>>> interpreters pypy ships with), if you wanted to try it. >>>> >>>> My two cents. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> William Leslie >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> [email protected] >>> http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev >> > _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
