Thanks - for future reference for anyone looking for the same thing..
I ``fixed'' this by exposing v8::internal::Heap::CollectAllGarbage()
by adding it to the v8:V8 interface in api.cc
void V8::CollectAllGarbage()
{
i::Heap::CollectAllGarbage();
}
Calling this at choice places (right before exit, after disposing a
context etc) solves the problem completely for me.
Thanks again,
garry
On Sep 27, 6:51 pm, "Simon Ask Ulsnes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/9/27 Garry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Thanks - but what happens on Exit/Shutdown? Is there a method to tell
> > v8 (or a v8 context) that we're exiting, so it should release
> > everything?
>
> Normally there is no reason to do any cleanup on process termination,
> since all file handles and network connections etc. are automatically
> terminated by the file system. All the resources, including memory, of
> a process are forcibly released when a process exits, so it's unlikely
> that the GC even runs at that time.
>
> If you need to explicitly release a custom resource, you should look
> at defining an atexit callback in C++.
>
>
>
> > Although my weak objects get collected after while in normal usage,
> > the weak reference callback doesn't get called on the objects that
> > still exist when exiting.
>
> > The only thing I've found is calling Dispose on the (single) context -
> > and that doesn't seem to do anything.
>
> > garry
>
> > On Sep 27, 5:15 pm, deanm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> A weak callback is called when an object than has a persistent handle
> >> is found unreferenced during garbage collection. This is similar to
> >> "finalizers" in other languages, for example Ruby. This is why you
> >> don't see the function getting called "right away", it will be called
> >> when there is a GC. If you want to trigger a GC, you could look at
> >> the GC extension. For example, when running with --expose-gc, a gc()
> >> method will be installed on the global object. I believe even this is
> >> not guaranteed to collect your objects, it depends how deep of a
> >> garbage collection is performed, and what space your objects are
> >> living in.
>
> >> On Sep 27, 2:15 pm, Garry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > Hi - I realised that in my code the weak function does get called, but
> >> > it isn't kicking in until about 4000 objects are created.
>
> >> > I put a counter in my create/destroy functions, and after 10,000
> >> > objects are created and I shut down, 3600 still exist undestroyed.
>
> >> > Is there a certain function I should be calling to tell V8 that I've
> >> > finished and it's time to collect all those remaining objects?
>
> >> > At the moment the only `shutdown' I'm doing is context.Dispose(); - is
> >> > that all that needs to be done?
>
> >> > As for your question, I did notice that in the Chrome code in their
> >> > weak gc function they called object.ClearWeak(); - but that might just
> >> > be to remove any hanging pointers.
>
> >> > I'd really love to see an official example of this kind of stuff. All
> >> > the examples I have found of weak references are using a global or
> >> > member var rather than a new/delete system.
>
> >> > garry
>
> >> > On Sep 27, 9:59 am, bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > > In my tests, it works, with the MakeWeak-callback. The callback ist
> >> > > called the first time, when there are about 400 unused Persistent
> >> > > Objects allocated
>
> >> > > i use following js code to test, where the fuction myobj returns a
> >> > > Persistent Object
>
> >> > > for (var c=0;c<200000;c++) {
> >> > > var x=myobj()
>
> >> > > }
>
> >> > > unfortuanatly, when i have allocated and deallocated about 160000
> >> > > objects, my program crashes. it looks like the GarbageCollector isn't
> >> > > freeing the Persistent Object after calling theMakeWeak-callback.
>
> >> > > in my callback i only delete my c++ object, do i have to do something
> >> > > with the Persistent<Object> ?
>
> >> > > markus
>
> >> > > On 26 Sep., 22:55, Garry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > > > Hey - did you solve this problem? I'm facing the same thing right
> >> > > > now..
>
> >> > > > I want to make an object that I push into Javascript, then when JS
> >> > > >garbagecollects it I get a callback so I can delete the c++ side
> >> > > > pointer. Is this the wrong approach?
>
> >> > > > garry
>
> >> > > > On Sep 22, 9:57 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> > > > > Thank you for the example.
> >> > > > > I also use:
> >> > > > > ........
> >> > > > > Persistent<Object> self =
> >> > > > > Persistent<Object>::New(args.Holder());
> >> > > > > self.MakeWeak(0, Point_Destroy);
>
> >> > > > > self->SetInternalField(0, External::New(p));
> >> > > > > return self;}
>
> >> > > > > void Point_Destroy(Persistent<Object> self, void* parameter)
> >> > > > > {
> >> > > > > Local<External> external =
> >> > > > > Local<External>::Cast(self->GetInternalField(0));
>
> >> > > > > deletestatic_cast<Point*>(external->Value());
>
> >> > > > > }
>
> >> > > > > but the "Point_Destroy" Function is never called. So when should
> >> > > > > it be
> >> > > > > called in your example?
>
> >> > > > > Thanks
> >> > > > > bg- Zitierten Text ausblenden -
>
> >> > > > - Zitierten Text anzeigen -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
v8-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
