On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Perrin Harkins wrote:
> Unfortunately, GTop is kind of a pain to compile. It seems to depend on
> some Gnome stuff. We use Apache::SizeLimit for this reason, and it works
> well.
there's a configure --disable-gnome switch for libgtop. can still be a
pain though.
The long time mythical
use less qw(memory);
pragma was always intended to address issues like that. It would be
fairly straightforward to implement (set a flag like use strict and
check it wherever memory could usefully be freed).
Tim.
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:53:38PM +0300, Ivan E.
it seems as if most (if not all) the techniques for checking the size of
the current process are _very_ platform specific. on linux you can use
Apache::SizeLimit::linux_size_check
which is just parsing /proc/self/status.
- mark
Stas Bekman wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wr
No, i did not mean freeing memory from lexicals. I meant the memory
allocated for the temporary results, such as
my $a = 'x' x 100
Here perl allocates 1M for $a and 1M for evaluating the right part,
after that it is possible to undef $a and reuse its memory (1M),
but the right part me
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Stas Bekman wrote:
> If you have linux you have (or can have GTop), which gives you an API to
> do this and many other things. Apache::SizeLimit::linux_size_check is just
> a custom function that you cannot really re-use (unless you put it into
> some other module...
Unfortuna
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, mark warren bracher wrote:
> it seems as if most (if not all) the techniques for checking the size of
> the current process are _very_ platform specific. on linux you can use
>
>Apache::SizeLimit::linux_size_check
If you have linux you have (or can have GTop), which gi
You probably tried this script on linux or some other not fully BSD
compartible system. We obtained same zeros on linux, where getrusage()
means something else than on FreeBSD,
but if you try measuring memory sizes with ps or top, you should
observe the mentioned leak. Please insert sleep(10)
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The output I get is
>
> used memory = 0
> used memory = 0
> used memory = 0
> used memory = 0
> used memory = 0
I get the same under perl 5.6.0 on linux, looks like BSD::Resource doesn't
work there :( Anyone?
Use gtop instead (if you have it):
Hi Ivan,
It's not really mod_perl, but is relevant to people on the list I guess...
If you really play aorund with this, you'll find some interesting variations.
If I assign $cc using a for loop
my $c;
for ( 1..2000) { $cc .= 'a'; }
it's a lot slower, but only uses
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Ivan E. Panchenko wrote:
> Today I discovered a strange behaiviour of perl,
> and I wonder if anybody can tell me what to do with it.
>
> The matter is that perl DOES NOT REUSE MEMORY allocated for
> intermediate calculation results. This is specially harmful to
> data-inten
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Ivan E. Panchenko wrote:
>
>
> Today I discovered a strange behaiviour of perl,
> and I wonder if anybody can tell me what to do with it.
>
> The matter is that perl DOES NOT REUSE MEMORY allocated for
> intermediate calculation results. This is specially harmful to
> dat
The output I get is
used memory = 0
used memory = 0
used memory = 0
used memory = 0
used memory = 0
I'm interested in how many leaks are possible in mod_perl
though because my mod_perl processes are getting bigger
with time -- about 200 requests is making the process
fatter by 1mb on the aver
Today I discovered a strange behaiviour of perl,
and I wonder if anybody can tell me what to do with it.
The matter is that perl DOES NOT REUSE MEMORY allocated for
intermediate calculation results. This is specially harmful to
data-intensive modperl applications where one perl process proces
13 matches
Mail list logo