On Monday 16 September 2024 at 06:20:37 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote: Maybe fighting leaks should start at developer level, then QA. Waiting to see gigabytes missing in a minute is a very crude way to recognize leak.
It's very common for computer algebra packages to have memory leaks, particularly because useful caching in one situation can be a memory leak in another -- it can really depend on the use case. Some memory leaks may end up unavoidable with certain designs.They usually arise from scenarios not considered by the original authors. It's great that you find them and hopefully it helps educate a new generation of developers. In practice, almost all computer algebra systems seem to benefit (both in memory use and in performance) from frequent restarts, so from a practical perspective one should always look for ways to chop a computation into smaller blocks and extracting meaningful intermediate results so that they can be recreated. This matches with strategies that help in generating reproducible results, so this is slightly less of a burden than one might think initially. Hunting memory leaks is definitely necessary to maintain a workable system but I don't think that completely eliminating them (or ensuring new ones don't appear!) is an attainable goal. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/4e7a7e79-b71a-43cb-9ce7-a3f158a6dfban%40googlegroups.com.
