On 18 April 2012 at 17:40, Nikolaos Bezirgiannidis wrote: | Hi all, | | I am a PhD student and I am working on a C project that involves some | statistical calculations. So, I tried to embed R into C, in order to | call R functions from a C program. My program seems to get the correct | results from R. However, it appears to have a lot of memory allocation | issues, in contrast to the small amounts of memory that my code | allocates. Some additional info that might be useful: I have build R | from source with shared libraries enabled and the compiler I use is gcc | version 4.61 in a Ubuntu 11.10 linux machine.
[ Well I suspect "sudo apt-get install r-base" would have given you the same; see the README at $CRAN/src/bin/linux/ubuntu ] | This is my function: | | static int prediction(double *berHistory, int berValues, double *ber) | { | SEXP e; | SEXP bers; | SEXP mean; | int i; | int errorOccurred; | static int init = 0; | char *argv[] = {"REmbeddedPostgres", "--gui=none", "--silent"}; | int argc = sizeof(argv)/sizeof(argv[0]); | | // Initialize Embedded R | if (init == 0) | { | Rf_initEmbeddedR(argc, argv); | } | init = 1; | | // Allocate bers and copy values | PROTECT(bers = allocVector(REALSXP, berValues)); | | for (i = 0; i < berValues; i++) | { | REAL(bers)[i] = berHistory[i]; | } | | PROTECT(mean = allocVector(REALSXP, 1)); | PROTECT(e = lang2(install("mean"), bers)); | mean = R_tryEval(e, R_GlobalEnv, &errorOccurred); | if (errorOccurred) | { | printf("error occurred in mean\n"); | } | | for (i = 0; i < berValues; i++) | { | REAL(bers)[i] = REAL(bers)[i] / REAL(mean)[0]; | } | | *ber = REAL(mean)[0]; | | Rf_endEmbeddedR(0); | UNPROTECT(3); | return 0; | } | | And these are the errors from Valgrind output: | | HEAP SUMMARY: | ==2909== in use at exit: 18,832,260 bytes in 6,791 blocks | ==2909== total heap usage: 21,758 allocs, 14,967 frees, 30,803,476 | bytes allocated | ==2909== | ==2909== 160 (40 direct, 120 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely | lost in loss record 179 of 1,398 | ==2909== at 0x4028876: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236) | ==2909== by 0x41B364C: nss_parse_service_list (nsswitch.c:626) | ==2909== by 0x41B3C59: __nss_database_lookup (nsswitch.c:167) | ==2909== by 0x59272F8: ??? | ==2909== by 0x5928CCC: ??? | ==2909== by 0x416ABA6: getpwuid_r@@GLIBC_2.1.2 (getXXbyYY_r.c:256) | ==2909== by 0x416A4ED: getpwuid (getXXbyYY.c:117) | ==2909== by 0x439CCB9: do_fileinfo (platform.c:944) | ==2909== by 0x43289ED: bcEval (eval.c:4430) | ==2909== by 0x4332CA4: Rf_eval (eval.c:397) | ==2909== by 0x43377E0: Rf_applyClosure (eval.c:855) | ==2909== by 0x432F17E: bcEval (eval.c:4410) | ==2909== | ==2909== 160 (40 direct, 120 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely | lost in loss record 180 of 1,398 | ==2909== at 0x4028876: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236) | ==2909== by 0x41B364C: nss_parse_service_list (nsswitch.c:626) | ==2909== by 0x41B3C59: __nss_database_lookup (nsswitch.c:167) | ==2909== by 0x5926148: ??? | ==2909== by 0x5926F3C: ??? | ==2909== by 0x41694A6: getgrgid_r@@GLIBC_2.1.2 (getXXbyYY_r.c:256) | ==2909== by 0x4168CAD: getgrgid (getXXbyYY.c:117) | ==2909== by 0x439CCEB: do_fileinfo (platform.c:947) | ==2909== by 0x43289ED: bcEval (eval.c:4430) | ==2909== by 0x4332CA4: Rf_eval (eval.c:397) | ==2909== by 0x43377E0: Rf_applyClosure (eval.c:855) | ==2909== by 0x432F17E: bcEval (eval.c:4410) | ==2909== | ==2909== LEAK SUMMARY: | ==2909== definitely lost: 80 bytes in 2 blocks | ==2909== indirectly lost: 240 bytes in 20 blocks | ==2909== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks | ==2909== still reachable: 18,831,940 bytes in 6,769 blocks Well I think there is no real bad error here. You lost 80 and 240 bytes. That is nothing to worry about, and somewhat normal. R is a dynamic system, valgrind measures "with some error". You can compare the result to doing an allocation of a longer vector and not freeing it. You could see if freeing your 'mean' variable at the end makes a difference, or using a pointer to a single (stack) instance instead of an allocation makes a difference. Likewise, you could returns bers as well. Or free it. Right now I am not entirely what it is that your 'prediction' function is trying to do. | Reachable error summary is far too long to include in this mail. The | interesting thing is that reachable errors are all caused by this small | function. | | Any ideas? I would also appreciate any suggestions on how to improve | the R-C integration in my code. Have you considered using R and C++ instead, and looked at Rcpp and RInside? http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com/code/rcpp.html http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com/code/rinside.html RInside in particular is a lot simpler, at least to me. But some people really want plain C in which case you know which route to take Dirk -- R/Finance 2012 Conference on May 11 and 12, 2012 at UIC in Chicago, IL See agenda, registration details and more at http://www.RinFinance.com ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel