#13447: Make libsingular multivariate polynomial rings collectable
-------------------------------------------------------+--------------------
Reporter: nbruin | Owner: rlm
Type: defect | Status:
needs_info
Priority: major | Milestone:
sage-5.4
Component: memleak | Resolution:
Keywords: | Work issues: Input
from libsingular experts
Report Upstream: Reported upstream. No feedback yet. | Reviewers:
Authors: | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------------+--------------------
Changes (by SimonKing):
* cc: vbraun, gagern (added)
Old description:
> Presently, #715 + #11521 help not permanently keeping parent in memory.
> In the process we uncovered a hard-but-consistently triggerable problem
> with the collection of `MPolynomialRing_libsingular`. We have only
> observed the problem on `bsd.math.washington.edu`, MacOSX 10.6 on x86_64.
>
> The present work-around is to permanently store references to these upon
> creation, thus preventing collection. It would be nice if we could
> properly solve the problem (or at least establish that the problem is
> specific to `bsd.math`)
New description:
Presently, #715 + #11521 help not permanently keeping parent in memory. In
the process we uncovered a hard-but-consistently triggerable problem with
the collection of `MPolynomialRing_libsingular`. We have only observed the
problem on `bsd.math.washington.edu`, MacOSX 10.6 on x86_64.
The present work-around is to permanently store references to these upon
creation, thus preventing collection. It would be nice if we could
properly solve the problem (or at least establish that the problem is
specific to `bsd.math`)
Apply [attachment:trac_13447-consolidated_refcount.patch]
--
Comment:
Replying to [comment:14 nbruin]:
> If I'm correctly understanding the problem,
[attachment:trac_13447-consolidated_refcount.patch] should be the
preferred solution.
I didn't test the patch yet. However, it seems very straight forward to
me: There already is a refcounting, and thus one should use it. I am
Cc'ing Volker Braun and Martin von Gagern, the authors of #11339. Does
[attachment:trac_13447-consolidated_refcount.patch] make sense to you as
well?
Keeping a double refcount (as with
[attachment:trac_13447-double_refcount.patch] seems suspicious to me.
Perhaps one should let the patchbots test it? Thus, I'll add this as
dependency for #715, and for the patchbot:
Apply trac_13447-consolidated_refcount.patch
PS: You really deserve a badge for debugging excellence! Do I understand
correctly that the bug is ''not'' on the side of Singular? I'll inform
Hans accordingly.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13447#comment:16>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
