-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 851
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Resolve issues identified by Valgrind #910
Conversation
abraunegg
commented
May 6, 2020
- bug fixes
* Update files based on tracing issues with Valgrind
* Update logging statement
…edrive into memory-leak-hunting
* Fix memory logger
* Update leak fixes
cleanup PR
* PR Updates
* Make sure the DB .wal cleanup is being done via exit scopes
@norbusan Service Details:
Data Details:
Observations / Notes: |
* minor tweaks
Memory output post data delete:
|
Hi Alex, I read through the whole change, not that I found something strange. What puzzles me is the replacement of
to
Is the auto mechanism not working properly and eating up memory? I will install that patch locally and let it run for some time. |
First comment after some iteration with reporting memory: it seems to be stable, most of the time I get
and around syncs I aget
these are the only numbers by now. When doing a periodic sync it switched to the lower numbers, and after that back to the upper numbers. No obvious changes for several loops. So seems to be fine... |
Yep .. nature of 'whack-a-mole' when testing each change locally, seeing what next Valgrind complained with.
Not 100% sure. Valgrind would complain when a variable was set to 'auto' and this not 'initialised' separately, but when set to correct type, then set to a value or function response, the Valgrind error would not appear. Personally I think that, that is a Valgrind issue not knowing D or the internal constructs ... but those changes - for example - 11b8ed9 error reported without change:
That commit - fixes that ... for no 'logical' reason as it is technically the same ... |
@norbusan |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, I had it now running for 2 days. Memory still increases slightly when files are downloaded, but I guess that is to be expected. The changes - as far as I could check with all the noise - look ok.
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |