[#14696] Inconsistency in rescuability of "return" — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>

Why can you not rescue return, break, etc when they are within

21 messages 2008/01/02
[#14699] Re: Inconsistency in rescuability of "return" — Gary Wright <gwtmp01@...> 2008/01/02

[#14738] Enumerable#zip Needs Love — James Gray <james@...>

The community has been building a Ruby 1.9 compatibility tip list on

15 messages 2008/01/03
[#14755] Re: Enumerable#zip Needs Love — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/01/04

Hello James,

[#14772] Manual Memory Management — Pramukta Kumar <prak@...>

I was thinking it would be nice to be able to free large objects at

36 messages 2008/01/04
[#14788] Re: Manual Memory Management — Marcin Raczkowski <mailing.mr@...> 2008/01/05

I would only like to add that RMgick for example provides free method to

[#14824] Re: Manual Memory Management — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/01/07

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 15:49:30 +0900, Marcin Raczkowski <mailing.mr@gmail.com> wrote:

[#14825] Re: Manual Memory Management — "Evan Weaver" <evan@...> 2008/01/07

Python supports 'del reference', which decrements the reference

[#14838] Re: Manual Memory Management — Marcin Raczkowski <mailing.mr@...> 2008/01/08

Evan Weaver wrote:

[#14911] Draft of some pages about encoding in Ruby 1.9 — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Folks:

24 messages 2008/01/10

[#14976] nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — David Flanagan <david@...>

The following just appeared in the ChangeLog

37 messages 2008/01/11
[#14977] Re: nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/01/11

Hi,

[#14978] Re: nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/01/11

[#14979] Re: nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/01/11

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#14993] Re: nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/01/11

[#14980] Re: nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — Gary Wright <gwtmp01@...> 2008/01/11

[#14981] Re: nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/01/11

Hi,

[#14995] Re: nil encoding as synonym for binary encoding — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/01/11

Yukihiro Matsumoto writes:

[#15050] how to "borrow" the RDoc::RubyParser and HTMLGenerator — Phlip <phlip2005@...>

Core Rubies:

17 messages 2008/01/13
[#15060] Re: how to "borrow" the RDoc::RubyParser and HTMLGenerator — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2008/01/14

On Jan 13, 2008, at 08:54 AM, Phlip wrote:

[#15062] Re: how to "borrow" the RDoc::RubyParser and HTMLGenerator — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/01/14

Eric Hodel wrote:

[#15073] Re: how to "borrow" the RDoc::RubyParser and HTMLGenerator — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2008/01/14

On Jan 13, 2008, at 20:35 PM, Phlip wrote:

[#15185] Friendlier methods to compare two Time objects — "Jim Cropcho" <jim.cropcho@...>

Hello,

10 messages 2008/01/22

[#15194] Can large scale projects be successful implemented around a dynamic programming language? — Jordi <mumismo@...>

A good article I have found (may have been linked by slashdot, don't know)

8 messages 2008/01/24

[#15248] Symbol#empty? ? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>

Hi --

24 messages 2008/01/28
[#15250] Re: Symbol#empty? ? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/01/28

Hi,

Re: Finding I need explicit "GC.start" in my programs to prevent extreme growth.

From: Brent Roman <brent@...>
Date: 2008-01-08 17:54:02 UTC
List: ruby-core #14853
What versions of Ruby have you tried?

I was able to duplicate this behavior only in ruby18.
ruby19 and ruby16 work fine.
 
             VMsize        Run Time
-----------------------------------
Ruby16    24MB          26sec
Ruby18   190MB         32sec
Ruby19    27MB          30sec

My guess is that something is calling malloc under the covers without going
through the ALLOC* macros.  The ALLOC_N, etc. wrappers check the total
bytes allocated and fire off a GC when it exceeds 8MB of so.
See the ruby_xmalloc() function in gc.c.

I'd be curious to know what you find.

Happy hunting,

- brent


Ron M-2 wrote:
> 
> Short summary:
>   * Some ruby scripts stay small (20MB) with GC.start
>     but grow very large (400MB) without.
>   * I would have expected ruby to do such garbage
>     collection automatically.
>   * 3 short test scripts shown that reproduce the
>     problem are below.
> 
> I find I have to force garbage collection using GC.start to keep
> some of my scripts from growing from 20MB (when I use GC.start)
> to 400+MB when I don't.  I'm quite sure I'm not hanging on to
> any references to large objects --- if only because explicit
> GC.start's stop the program from growing.
> 
> The first two programs below are the shortest test case
> I can make that show the problem.  Test program 1
> only differs from test program 2 in that the second
> one has GC.start in the loop.   The first one grows
> to over 400MB.  The second one stays under 25MB.
> 
> Is there a way I can tell Ruby to automatically run the
> garbage collector more frequently?
> 
> Also strange - it seems that stuff done outside the loop
> has a side effect that triggers the behavior.   In the third
> test script below I changed it to not call "flatten" outside
> the loop -- which seems to change the behavior of garbage
> collection in the loop.
> 
> ....
> 
> Any thoughts what I should do?
>   * keep calling gc from my loop?
>   * buy more memory?
>   * file a bug report somewhere?
> 
>    Ron
> 
> PS: This was discussed a bit on comp.lang.ruby earlier, and
> Eric Mahurin who suggested there may be a bug around
> rb_ary_splice and/or rb_str_buf_cat and provided more
> test cases.  That thread can be found here http://tinyurl.com/358zyw
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Finding-I-need-explicit-%22GC.start%22-in-my-programs-to-prevent-extreme-growth.-tp14678178p14694908.html
Sent from the ruby-core mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


In This Thread