I was able to fix the memory issue by using the (undocumented...)
WSGIAppController. I actually had to go to tg/controllers/
wsgiappcontroller.py to figure what the hell was going on, but I came
up with this solution.

After creating the tarfield in a StringIO object, I store
theTarFile.getvalue() in some variable (tmp), then close all of the
open StringIO objects. Instead of returning the raw bytestream, I do:

return WSGIAppController(DataApp(tmp, content_type='application/x-tar;
charset=utf8', content_disposition='attachment;
filename="ImageRequest.tar"'))._default(kwargs)

Now, the memory usage doesn't accumulate, and does indeed drop down to
a (rather bloated) baseline of ~700MB.

I see there is a ticket to do so, but you guys should really document
WSGIAppController!! http://sourceforge.net/p/turbogears2/tickets/10/

On Apr 25, 1:53 pm, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:
> How long does it take to fall down to 600MB? I just did 10 downloads
> from the page and the process is still holding onto 1.2 GB of memory
> and has been that way for ~10 minutes. I'm running on Mac OS 10.6, but
> this same behavior happens on the Red Hat server I am mainly using.
>
> I agree that when I comment out the "return" the memory usage drops
> down to some baseline, but obviously I need to serve the files and so
> I need to figure out why returning the data causes the memory to fill
> up. Do you have any suggestions? I just want to wipe the file out of
> memory after it is returned.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
> On Apr 25, 1:22 pm, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 25, 2011, at 5:41 PM, Adrian wrote:
>
> > > Sorry for the wait, this weekend got a little crazy.. Here is a tar/
> > > zipped Turbogears project I created:http://a-p-w.com/tarfile-test.tar.gz
>
> > > I did the simplest possible thing "paster quickstart" and followed the
> > > directions. Then I added a function to 'root.py' called 'returnImages'
> > > that just tars up 3 files (that I included in the tarball) and returns
> > > the bytestream for the tar file. I just tried this on my machine - I
> > > downloaded the file several times and watched the memory usage climb
> > > accordingly. It's set up to run on localhost:8080, so the page to go
> > > to ishttp://localhost:8080/returnImages
>
> > After fixing a missing import, I can run the example.
>
> > But I don't see a leak. The memory usage is increasing, and nears 1GB at 
> > times.
>
> > But it always falls back to some base-line, around 600MB.
>
> > I re-did the experiment with TG20. Two observations:
>
> >  - the memory baseline was roughly half of what TG21 created.
> >  - the app seemed to run *much* faster
>
> > I don't have explanations for either of the phenomena.
>
> > On a probably related, but more general note: Just because Python collects 
> > garbage, and might even return memory to the OS, the memory consumption is 
> > not going down visibly often. The reason is that the OS may well chose to 
> > assign the peak mem to the process, because it's avoiding offset costs for 
> > memory page assignment and some funky other stuff OSses do.
>
> > Another observation: the memory consumption was massively reduced, when I 
> > just didn't return the actual data. So there might in fact be some lazy and 
> > eventually gc'ed data-structure responsible for this hi peaking memory, and 
> > it might well be worth examining that. But it's not a leak.
>
> > Diez

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TurboGears" 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/turbogears?hl=en.

Reply via email to