[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 20051010: 6.4.2 pqact memory leak and suggestion



Hi Daryl,

> To: address@hidden
> From: Daryl Herzmann <address@hidden>
> Subject: 6.4.2 pqact memory leak and suggestion
> Organization: Iowa State
> Keywords: 200510101443.j9AEhaG7021664 LDM-6.4.2 pqact memory leak

The above message contained the following:

> I am rolling with LDM 6.4.2 on RHEL AS 4.2 x86_64.  I am not sure how much 
> this dovetails with Michael Doss, but I am noticing a memory leak in 
> pqact.

Indeed!  That shouldn't happen.  I've started my LDM 6.4.2 and will
particular attention to the memory usage of the pqact(1) process.

> For instance:
> 
> ldm       7592  0.3 11.4 408860 235936 ?     S    08:16   0:14 pqact -f 
> ANY-NEXRAD etc/pqact.conf
> ldm       7593  0.1  4.0 406192 83860 ?      S    08:16   0:07 pqact -f 
> NEXRAD etc/pqact_NEXRAD.conf
> 
> and their memory usage keeps on growing...

I'm afraid that the above doesn't show a memory leak because it's just a
snapshop of two pqact(1) processes rather than a time-series.

I expect the memory-usage of a pqact(1) process to grow initially.
It should, however, reach a plateau when it runs out of virgin
file-descriptors and starts reusing them.

> I am running a number of 
> custom decoders, so perhaps the trouble is there?

Unlikely.  Your ps(1) utility shouldn't lump the memory-usage by
decoders into its report on any pqact(1) processes.

> But I have never seen 
> this before on other systems I run...
> 
> And a suggestion...
> 
> Would it be possible to change this error message:
> 
> Oct 10 13:16:40 mesonet pqact[7592] NOTE: child 7699 exited with status 1
> 
> and into something a bit more descriptive?  like
> 
> Oct 10 13:16:40 mesonet pqact[7592] NOTE: child 7699 exited with status 1 
> cmd was (PIPE close   -strip scripts/RR3parse.py)
> 
> Even in USR2 mode, there is nothing that ties an INFO line to a NOTE 
> line...

That's in my list.  I'm not sure, however, if that would be a big-fix or
a new feature.  If it's a bug-fix, then I can put it in 6.4.3.  If,
however, it's a new feature, then it'll have to wait until 6.5.

What do you think?

> thanks,
>    daryl
> 
> -- 
> /**
>   * Daryl Herzmann (address@hidden)
>   * Program Assistant -- Iowa Environmental Mesonet
>   * http://mesonet.agron.iastate.edu
>   */

Regards,
Steve Emmerson

> NOTE: All email exchanges with Unidata User Support are recorded in the
> Unidata inquiry tracking system and then made publicly available
> through the web.  If you do not want to have your interactions made
> available in this way, you must let us know in each email you send to us.


NOTE: All email exchanges with Unidata User Support are recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and then made publicly available through the web. If you do not want to have your interactions made available in this way, you must let us know in each email you send to us.