#5970: Weak references in Polynomial Ring cache
--------------------------------------------+-------------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner: malb
Type: defect | Status: needs_work
Priority: critical | Milestone: sage-4.8
Component: commutative algebra | Keywords: polynomial ring
cache weak reference
Work_issues: regression for test_ec_leak? | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Author:
Merged: | Dependencies:
--------------------------------------------+-------------------------------
Changes (by SimonKing):
* cc: vbraun (added)
Comment:
I wonder why the example leaks, though. With the patches from #11521 and a
not-yet-published patch for #715, I obtain:
{{{
sage: import gc
sage: from sage.rings.finite_rings.finite_field_base import is_FiniteField
sage: K = GF(151)
sage: predicate = lambda x: is_FiniteField(x) and x.order() == 151
sage: del K
sage: gc.collect()
174
sage: [bla for bla in gc.get_objects() if predicate(bla)]
[]
}}}
So, prime fields do not seem to leak.
{{{
sage: from sage.rings.polynomial.multi_polynomial_ring import
is_MPolynomialRing
sage: K = GF(151)
sage: P = K['x','y','z']
sage: del P
sage: gc.collect()
33
sage: predicate = lambda x: is_MPolynomialRing(x) and
x.variable_names()==['x','y','z'] and x.base_ring() is K
sage: [bla for bla in gc.get_objects() if predicate(bla)]
[]
}}}
So, where does the leak come from??? The example from the ticket
description does use polynomial rings over finite prime fields!
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5970#comment:25>
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.
