On Wednesday 25 April 2007 08:31, Andy Dougherty wrote: > So, good detective work. I think you've plugged an important leak. > Alas, there are still (at least) two problems: > > 1. It's still leaking memory badly for me. It improved from test 185 > to 227, but that's a long way from completing all 960 tests.
Are you running these tests with or without -G? If I set a 30MB ulimit and run them with -G, I get some OOM failures. > 2. Garbage collection really slows the program down (I observed factors > of 10 difference in speed with and without -G), and I have a vague > unsupported suspicion that the slowdown grows faster than linearly with > the allocated memory. Marking as at least O(n) for the number of objects in memory, and sweeping is O(n) on top of that. -- c
