| Re: Asynchronous IDL_IDLBridge causing memory leak [message #82756 is a reply to message #72310] |
Fri, 18 January 2013 09:56   |
Russell Ryan
Messages: 122
Registered: May 2012
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Forgive me for waking the dead and releasing the zombie posts. But I've noticed a similar behavior on IDL 8.1. From a little testing, I've found that if I put calls to systime() and memory() on either side of the Bridge->Execute,/nowait call I can see (1) the time to start an asynchronous call and (2) it's memory usage increase with time. I'll try implementing this ugly-looking work around and see what ITT has to say about it?
-Russell
On Tuesday, August 31, 2010 11:31:59 AM UTC-4, Seth Johnson wrote:
> On Aug 30, 10:02 am, Seth Johnson <seth.spjoh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 30, 8:35 am, Bennett <juggernau...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 27, 2:39 pm, Seth Johnson <seth.spjoh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Sorry, I realized there was a mistake in the second example, it should
>>>> be:
>>
>>>> oBridge=OBJARR(5)
>>>> FOR chain=0,4 DO BEGIN oBridge[chain]=Obj_New('IDL_IDLBridge')
>>
>>>> FOR i=0,999 DO BEGIN
>>>> FOR chain=0,4 do BEGIN
>>>> a=bindgen(1E4,1E3)
>>>> oBridge[chain]->SetVar,'a',a
>>>> oBridge[chain]->Execute,'a=a+a',/NOWAIT
>>>> ENDFOR
>>
>>>> FOR chain=0,4 DO WHILE oBridge[chain]->Status() NE 0 DO wait,0.0001
>>>> ENDFOR
>>>> OBJ_DESTROY,oBridge
>>
>>>> I do not destroy the objects until the very end as there are
>>>> parameters and routines that need to be loaded into each IDL_IDLBridge
>>>> for various computations in addition to parameters that change with
>>>> every iteration. Destroying and recreating would be a rather large
>>>> boon to processing time while the initial problem caused by
>>>> asynchronous operation still remains.
>>
>>> I've noticed that leak in 6.3 but not in 7.0+. Which version are you
>>> running?
>>
>> Strange, I have tested this on IDL versions 7.0 and 7.1, both of which
>> produce the leak. Could the cause perhaps lie in the setup or one of
>> the required packages? I have noticed while testing on different
>> machines that 7.0 and 7.1 use different versions of the shared library
>> libstdc++.so.
>
> It is not the most elegant of solutions, but I have found a temporary
> work around for the memory leak. Rather than calling the asynchronous
> processes from the main routine, I create a single child process that
> then creates its own children and performs the asynchronous calls
> similar to:
>
> oBridge=Obj_New('IDL_IDLBridge')
> oBridge->SetVar,'a',a
> oBridge->Execute,"oBridge=Obj_New('IDL_IDLBridge')"
> oBridge->Execute,"oBridge->SetVar,'a',a"
> FOR i=0,999 DO BEGIN
> tmp=memory()
> oBridge->Execute,"oBridge->Execute,'a=a+a',/NOWAIT"
> print,memory(/high)
> WHILE oBridge->GetVar('oBridge->Status()') NE 0 DO wait,0.0001
> ENDFOR
>
> The child process (and its children) do not appear to leak memory as
> the parent call does. I find it rather peculiar that this method
> works, even after loading the IDL startup file into the child
> processes.
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
