Re: huge memory leak in 2.0.x

2004-06-15 Thread Bill Stoddard
Bill Stoddard wrote: @@ -1340,7 +1343,7 @@ /* Run cleanups */ run_cleanups(&pool->cleanups); -pool->cleanups = NULL; +pool->free_cleanups = pool->cleanups = NULL; /* If new child pools showed up, this is a reason to raise a flag */ if (pool->child) @@ -1886,7 +1889,

Re: huge memory leak in 2.0.x

2004-06-15 Thread Bill Stoddard
@@ -1340,7 +1343,7 @@ /* Run cleanups */ run_cleanups(&pool->cleanups); -pool->cleanups = NULL; +pool->free_cleanups = pool->cleanups = NULL; /* If new child pools showed up, this is a reason to raise a flag */ if (pool->child) @@ -1886,7 +1889,13 @@ #endif /* APR_

Re: huge memory leak in 2.0.x

2004-06-15 Thread Cliff Woolley
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Joe Orton wrote: > apr_brigade_create() does that already. Oh, duh, of course it does. As many times as I've looked at that line, you'd think I'd have it memorized by now. :)

Re: huge memory leak in 2.0.x

2004-06-15 Thread Joe Orton
On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 03:14:53PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Joe Orton wrote: > > > 2) allocate brigade structures using the bucket allocator > > If you're going to do this, then surely you need to call > apr_pool_cleanup_register() somewhere? apr_brigade_create() does t

Re: huge memory leak in 2.0.x

2004-06-15 Thread Cliff Woolley
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Joe Orton wrote: > 2) allocate brigade structures using the bucket allocator If you're going to do this, then surely you need to call apr_pool_cleanup_register() somewhere? === RCS file: /home/cvs/apr-util/buck

Re: huge memory leak in 2.0.x

2004-06-15 Thread Joe Orton
On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 03:23:42PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote: > http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23567 OK, the issues I was having with using the bucket allocator to allocate the brigade were just my own screwups. So, the patches needed to fix this issue are attached: 1) re-use pool

Re: huge memory leak in 2.0.x

2004-06-15 Thread Joe Orton
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23567 On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 01:45:26PM -0600, Brad Nicholes wrote: >Actually I think this was addressed quite a while ago with the > introduction of the MaxMemFree directive. This problem sounds a lot > like the bucket issue where memory all