On 22/01/13 17:06, Facundo Batista wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Phil Mayers <p.may...@imperial.ac.uk> wrote: > >> On 22/01/13 16:45, Facundo Batista wrote: >>> >>> Yes, but note that without the __del__ it had the same behaviour... >>> >> >> Not quite. The OP said that: >> >> a) He had a problem with a Twisted app not freeing memory under load >> b) He had reproduced that problem with his example, that included __del__ >> >> Nowhere did he say "it does the same without __del__". He was in fact >> not specific about whether the original/real code uses __del__ or not. > > He didn't say it. I'm saying it, after testing it. >
When you say "it", you mean his example code as posted to the list, right? Because having just tested it, I don't see any problem - his example code has stable memory usage for both client/server processes, and with the client making 1, 100 or 1000 connections/sec, and the debug shows protocol and factory instances being freed as I would expect i.e. in a timely fashion, not just at process close. Tested on both: Python 2.7.3 / Twisted 11.1.0 / Linux 64-bit Python 2.6.8 / Twisted 12.2.0 / Linux 64-bit Odd... _______________________________________________ Twisted-Python mailing list Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python
