World: r3wp
[RAMBO] The REBOL bug and enhancement database
older newer | first last |
Rebolek 2-Oct-2006 [1809] | Ingo you're right :) So description of PATH should look like: USAGE: PATH value selector DESCRIPTION: Path selection. Returns error! or nothing. PATH is an action value. ARGUMENTS: value -- (Type: any) selector -- (Type: any) |
Ladislav 2-Oct-2006 [1810] | the only problem with this description is what is your "nothing"? |
Gabriele 2-Oct-2006 [1811x2] | it think, that the bug is PATH being exposed |
it would be nice to have a working PATH action though (not the current one which seems to be an internal thing) | |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1813x5] | speaking about VID memory leak. "but its some intermittent thing... like I said previously, I never got around to tracking it... I only know something within VID, especially when creating many stylesheets dynamically, eventually grows mem use a lot." |
glayout, being a nested VID engine, will effectively call layout many times each one might have its own style word calls. | |
so if you specify many variations of button, for example, it seems like if the WHOLE stylesheet is saved separately. over and over. | |
closing and freeing (setting to none) all code-related references to the shown views never amounted to releasing the used up ram. | |
showing/closing the same windows over and over has even caused memory leaks for me. | |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1818] | Alright, these are serious issues, so I would like to set up a demo of this and try to isolate. |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1819] | its not always obvious, but in larger apps (the likes of altme) there is a memory increase all the while you play around... |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1820] | Can you write some quick code which shows the first idea. |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1821] | I remember that I was able to get the same issues using only VID, so GLayout was not the source cause... it was only amplifying a VID/View bug. |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1822x2] | I can understand it's harder to find bugs hiding out in larger apps. |
How to track memory usage within rebol - probably stats... | |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1824] | yess. I will try to write up a very small and unsexy test... give me 5 |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1825] | Mmm.. stats is more featured than it used to be. |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1826x3] | yes. |
the GC in 1.3.2 was improved a lot. | |
there are MUCH less mem crashes then there used to be. | |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1829x2] | I think I'll try to make a forever loop and log stats to a file, then maybe graph the stats to see what happens towards the end. |
(Providing I show any crashes this way). | |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1831x2] | I was able to allocate 1 million liquid nodes (~ 700MB worth of ram) and although the GC slows down a lot after 400MB, it does not crash, until you start missing real RAM. |
(its possible the 400MB GC slow-down is system specific, and people with newer/better machine with more ram will get the bottleneck further away. | |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1833] | Ok, but how does the stylize loop look ? For example: forever [ stylize/master [button: button "hello"] ] |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1834x5] | I am doing something similar, but have not reproduced the actual leak yet. |
I am hoping I'll find an example which will. | |
this *might* have been fixed in v1.3.2 although my tests are simple, no stylesheet creation is now leaking even one byte! | |
but the 30MB ram using vid script is nothing rare. | |
the leak (if still there) might be specific to one feature of vid, like the init block or feel, or whatever... I have no idea. | |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1839] | Can you show it easily on an older view ? |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1840] | not anymore... I'm not setup for this anymore... unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time tonight... I have to test cheyenne and start putting my web site back online in order to get slim, glayout and liquid "out in the open". |
Anton 12-Oct-2006 [1841] | Ok, another time. |
Maxim 12-Oct-2006 [1842x3] | (and am still fiddling around with a cleaner http-post func) |
but IIRC I can still see the mem leak in GLayout... so maybe another time I can look in my old dev backups and find a VID test I had done which re-created the leak. | |
(that's before devcon 2004) | |
Henrik 13-Oct-2006 [1845] | One has to be careful reloading scripts in the same console multiple times as this will also eat up hundreds of MB's of memory. I'm sure that I'm doing something "wrong" in those scripts, but have no time to investigate what it is. I wanted to ask earlier on a memory usage group and that we don't have one. Wouldn't it be nice to get laid out what techniques are useful in order to converve memory? Maybe the experts can put in a word or two on that. View does indeed also eat lots of memory, as well as image creation with to-image. |
Anton 13-Oct-2006 [1846] | I can see the page now: "Memory Conservation in Rebol" |
Henrik 13-Oct-2006 [1847] | see it? in your mind or what? |
BrianH 13-Oct-2006 [1848] | What, with the entire VID and port systems as counterexamples? |
Maxim 13-Oct-2006 [1849] | one quick memory saving trick... don't use view ;-) |
BrianH 13-Oct-2006 [1850] | Works for me, most of the time. Most of what I do can be done in /Core, much of it in /Base. |
Maxim 13-Oct-2006 [1851] | unfortunately, most of what I do uses view ;-) |
Henrik 13-Oct-2006 [1852] | same here, but I don't see the problem as often as with continuous reuse of scripts in the same console. they might be graphics related, but not necessarily View related. |
BrianH 13-Oct-2006 [1853] | Well you're graphics guys, while I mostly do file and data manipulation. |
Robert 15-Oct-2006 [1854] | Henrik, yes, I know this problem. Looks to me that some things aren't reseted. You can see this, if you have a face A in the first run and than a face B (and not A anymore) in the second run. A is still available. |
Anton 15-Oct-2006 [1855] | Henrik, ah yes, in my mind, sorry :) |
Henrik 17-Oct-2006 [1856] | the clipboard bug mentioned in AltME is not rambo'ed? it would be easy to fix, wouldn't it? |
Rebolek 17-Oct-2006 [1857] | what's the difference between Build and Done in RAMBO? Lot of bugs says Build with comment like "Fixed in 1.3.1 (1.3.2)". Shouldn't those bugs be marked as Done? |
Gabriele 17-Oct-2006 [1858] | rebolek, the process should be built -> tested -> done. if noone is testing, they never get to tested. :) (we eventually assume that no news means good news and mark them.) |
older newer | first last |