On Monday, July 30, 2012 2:05:33 PM UTC-5, Dominique Pelle wrote: > Dominique Pellé wrote: > > > > > Enda wrote: > > > > > >> 'echo "" > filetowipe' would be a new file, I want to edit the same file. > > >> > > >> I don't want to crash my desktop again. I think the fact that ex creates > > >> .swp and .swo files might contribute to the problem. > > >> > > >> - Enda > > > > > > > > > Somehow %d (same 1,$d) is using a lot of memory > > > with big files. > > > > > > This is what I did: > > > > > > 1) Create a 150 Mb file (10 M lines) with: > > > $ yes 'this is a test' | sed 10000000q > test.txt > > > > > > 2) Start vim with: vim -u NONE test.txt > > > On my PC, this is using 202 Mb of virtual memory > > > > > > 3) :%d > > > Virtual memory usage jumps to 729 Mb > > > > > > My suspicion was that undo needs lots of memory. > > > Doing the same steps with :set ul=1 | %d > > > hence disabling undo saves a lot of memory but > > > memory usage still jumps from 202 Mb to 462Mb > > > when replace step 3) with: > > > > > > :set ul=-1 | %d > > > > > > I wonder what uses so much memory when undo > > > is disabled. > > > > > > I also profiled memory usage with... > > > > > > $ valgrind --tool=massif ./vim -u NONE > > > > > > ... and it gives the following usage at the peak of memory use > > > (using a 75 Mb test.txt file): > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > n time(i) total(B) useful-heap(B) extra-heap(B) > > stacks(B) > > > > > > 21 6,382,232,109 237,533,520 192,136,937 45,396,583 > > 0 > > > 80.89% (192,136,937B) (heap allocation functions) malloc/new/new[], > > > --alloc-fns, etc. > > > ->80.79% (191,902,967B) 0x810FE7B: lalloc (misc2.c:929) > > > | ->72.35% (171,861,290B) 0x810FD98: alloc (misc2.c:828) > > > | | ->40.45% (96,088,064B) 0x81F6471: mf_alloc_bhdr (memfile.c:951) > > > | | | ->40.45% (96,088,064B) 0x81F5B1B: mf_new (memfile.c:392) > > > | | | ->40.29% (95,703,040B) 0x80F1F14: ml_new_data (memline.c:3503) > > > | | | | ->40.29% (95,698,944B) 0x80F08C6: ml_append_int (memline.c:2751) > > > | | | | | ->40.29% (95,698,944B) 0x80F03E6: ml_append (memline.c:2525) > > > | | | | | ->40.29% (95,698,944B) 0x80C4A2D: readfile (fileio.c:2219) > > > | | | | | ->40.29% (95,698,944B) 0x804E0D8: open_buffer (buffer.c:140) > > > | | | | | ->40.29% (95,698,944B) 0x81EF6DB: create_windows > > (main.c:2632) > > > | | | | | ->40.29% (95,698,944B) 0x81ED22D: main (main.c:833) > > > | | | | | > > > | | | | ->00.00% (4,096B) in 1+ places, all below ms_print's > > > threshold (01.00%) > > > | | | | > > > | | | ->00.16% (385,024B) in 1+ places, all below ms_print's > > > threshold (01.00%) > > > | | | > > > | | ->31.58% (75,001,587B) 0x8110278: vim_strsave (misc2.c:1253) > > > | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x8132825: op_yank (ops.c:2985) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x8130043: op_delete (ops.c:1728) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x80AF4F0: ex_operators (ex_docmd.c:8500) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x80A68CC: do_one_cmd (ex_docmd.c:2668) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x80A4194: do_cmdline (ex_docmd.c:1122) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x812710A: nv_colon (normal.c:5412) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x812070B: normal_cmd > > (normal.c:1193) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x81EDBA3: main_loop > > (main.c:1294) > > > | | | | ->31.57% (74,998,440B) 0x81ED5C0: main (main.c:998) > > > > > > I'll try to investigate more later. > > > > > > -- Dominique > > > > > > Ah of course, when doing %d Vim is storing the deleted text > > into the unnamed register so that's using lots of memory. > > > > I can delete the entire file without memory increase by > > disabling undo and using the black hole register "_ : > > > > :set ul=-1 > > gg"_dG > > >
So I suppose the OP should try (if they're on a 64 bit system): ex -s largefile -c '%d _' -c wq If they're not on a 64-bit system, Vim can't open the file so they should instead use (from Tony): ex -s -c 'saveas! largefile' -c q ...which will be faster and use less memory anyway, even on a 64-bit system. Or they could just use any of the several non-Vim solutions given. -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
