Nikhil Patel added the comment: I'd like to respectfully disagree with the suggestions/conclusions mentioned here. I'll explain my reasoning and conclusions below.
First the short version - I'm fairly confident the leak actually has to do with: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/Lib/test/test_tools/test_unparse.py#L282 my approach: It was initially implied that we can begin to pinpoint the leak from within the test_files() method in test_tools.test_unparse.DirectoryTestCase. I ran the tests using the command: python_d -m test -R 3:3 test_tools.test_unparse -m test_files I had test_files() print the files selected in line 282 (and limited sample size to 1). Result: (note: i shortened printed pathnames manually after the fact, as it printed the absolute paths) python_d -m test -R 3:3 test_tools.test_unparse -m test_files Run tests sequentially 0:00:00 [1/1] test_tools.test_unparse Testing cpython\Lib\test\test_spwd.py beginning 6 repetitions 123456 Testing cpython\Lib\copy.py .Testing cpython\Lib\test\test_isinstance.py .Testing cpython\Lib\test\test_bytes.py .Testing cpython\Lib\test\test_csv.py .Testing cpython\Lib\test\test_dynamic.py .Testing cpython\Lib\test\test_xml_etree.py . test_tools.test_unparse leaked [3, 0, 13] references, sum=16 test_tools.test_unparse leaked [6, 2, 4] memory blocks, sum=12 test_tools.test_unparse failed 1 test failed: test_tools.test_unparse Total duration: 4 sec Tests result: FAILURE Then I made a slight modification: I replaced random.sample(names,1) on line 282 with a list containing the absolute paths to each of those files it tested in the run I described above. That means each of those files would be loaded, compiled and their tests run 6 times. Result: python_d -m test -R 3:3 test_tools.test_unparse -m test_files Run tests sequentially 0:00:00 [1/1] test_tools.test_unparse beginning 6 repetitions 123456 ...... 1 test OK. Total duration: 24 sec Tests result: SUCCESS Conclusion: If the same source files are being read, compiled, and their tests run - with different results - then I do not believe the leak can be associated with the self.checkRoundTrip() method or the compile() method I don't have an in-depth explanation why this is the case. But removing the call to random.sample() fixes the issue, I am reasonably sure of it. I presume to say this because I commented out lines 280-282 and instead I made it instead iterate through subsets of size 50 using slicing (so names[:50] etc) in line 284. I went through the entire set of files, 50 at a time. All ran successfully. ---------- nosy: +npatel _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue30542> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
