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

Re: 20051010: 6.4.2 pqact memory leak and suggestion

This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.

  • Subject: Re: 20051010: 6.4.2 pqact memory leak and suggestion
  • Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:56:40 -0600
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.