Hi,
All right with r3839. Thank you.
-Jukka-
edgar Soldin wrote:
>
> ok, my bad :) ..
>
> Jukka, can you please check rev.3836+ ?
>
> ..ede
>
> On 03.12.2013 11:19, edgar.sol...@web.de wrote:
> > innocent until the guilt is proven ;)) .. i'll try to squeeze in a
> > checkup of that matter!..
ok, my bad :) ..
Jukka, can you please check rev.3836+ ?
..ede
On 03.12.2013 11:19, edgar.sol...@web.de wrote:
> innocent until the guilt is proven ;)) .. i'll try to squeeze in a checkup of
> that matter!.. ede
>
> On 03.12.2013 09:41, michael.mich...@free.fr wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks Jukka,
On 04.12.2013 11:17, Rahkonen Jukka wrote:
> It is nice to have snapshot builds available.
yeah, that's the idea. have them lingering so users can easily pinpoint evil
commits from the nearer past.
>It would be even more nice if we had also some tests to verify if the builds
>are good and that
-
Michael Michaud wrote:
> Aihe: Re: [JPP-Devel] OpenJUMP does not free memory after removing a big
> layer
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks Jukka, seems like a regression.
> It happened between 3673 and 3732.
> @Ede, I could not investigate too much, because I'm no more connecte
Hi
> innocent until the guilt is proven ;))
Sure, I don't have evidence... I mean not yet ;-)
> .. i'll try to squeeze in a checkup of
Thanks, without connexion, I feel a bit inefficient
these days, but hopefully i'll soon wired again.
Michaël
> that matter!.. ede
>
> On 03.12.2013 09:41, mic
innocent until the guilt is proven ;)) .. i'll try to squeeze in a checkup of
that matter!.. ede
On 03.12.2013 09:41, michael.mich...@free.fr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks Jukka, seems like a regression.
> It happened between 3673 and 3732.
> @Ede, I could not investigate too much, because I'm no more
Hi,
Thanks Jukka, seems like a regression.
It happened between 3673 and 3732.
@Ede, I could not investigate too much, because I'm no more
connected to the web at home, but I noticed one commit with
many changes about Layer, LayerManager and a new interface
Disposable (revision 3724). I think the r
Hi Jukka,
That's strange, I often checked that memory is released,
but there maybe some cases where it is retained somewhere.
I'll check more with jml files.
I think a plugin may hold a reference to a layer and retain
its content in memory. In this case, it would be very useful
to identify the plu
Hi,
Tested with:
- OpenJUMP Plus r.3803
- Windows 7 64-bit
- jre 1.7_07 64-bit
- polygon dataset with 1.1 million features, size 3.2 GB in JML format.
See what happen with the memory consumption when I start OpenJUMP and open the
polygon dataset into an empty project:
After loading the datase
