From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A03A29D for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:09:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-io0-f175.google.com (mail-io0-f175.google.com [209.85.223.175]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A60EDA1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:09:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iodv82 with SMTP id v82so48551591iod.0 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:09:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=vinumeris.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=+Q4jsXvqoVcuHb2AZ0lBxBjRttymCw2yV/x3GScoLlI=; b=hT0TCWl5QhYFe5tPdeQ0c1ZzBwjPR6xHqntDhLwaSs+UTEl4rS4iinSzceGPbcqRhP rUewev8cQuiY8gg+6G2w/sLohmmDSAmWrGWIsLYGxa3Jc7ISLMVaB4b426WS12SX5Cx1 t6CZ5/gxzZ+6hcySR86tJd2+jofNpQWHyWYz4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=+Q4jsXvqoVcuHb2AZ0lBxBjRttymCw2yV/x3GScoLlI=; b=PN+jp3p2VVWeIOiabSt9p8WRx+vQukHDiWOXSmDtbiFRoLgJY65uT2AfRRT7tKar3N 1NFxOyX8ro0KOeWOoN5z26IpCNhbhEKZtEuQ7NXutLiPtrqX5VNy98n3d/8Cf0rh1nkB wjfoBujKKO8Sy41cMzBnx73CalPxgwN+GgVPdNm57nuV0jxXC61GUzbNHeQ/Su5c8twj lfm/73ttlrtaHZ5nJ3j7LiMrX4peQBApS3nipX5RUCN9umDtvV0EnDdZVbOqC4yUGqKW 5bF1siJeSJP3wk2hsuEPHACvPZHtZ+dEC0wqSuBUuGrmpsxDkOtut0claufMhtTkrgno IUSA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl3uuFWOGMF12luPqcrHY/LbTDhCPuHPUc1GeftRuTfbAc80H96WXmNLwMpXaD7Umi3ECMy MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.165.140 with SMTP id o134mr2222223ioe.29.1444813780936; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.123.166 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.123.166 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:09:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2354813.5q0TUrZsWe@garp> References: <99C42DE7-814A-48F8-AB28-A5ADD77A9FD9@toom.im> <2354813.5q0TUrZsWe@garp> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:09:40 +0200 Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: bitcoin-xt Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1141fb902e200405220cece2 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Memory leaks? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:09:42 -0000 --001a1141fb902e200405220cece2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Leaks are not the only explanation possible. Caches and fragmentation can also give this sort of effect. Unfortunately the tools to debug this aren't great. You could try a build with tcmalloc and use it to investigate heap stats. Odinn, trolling like a 3 year old will get you swiftly banned. Last warning. On 14 Oct 2015 9:58 am, "Tom Zander" wrote: > On Tuesday 13 Oct 2015 14:56:08 Jonathan Toomim via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > Does anybody have any guesses where we might be leaking memory, or what > is > > using the additional 2.4 GB? I've been using minrelaytxfee=0.00003 or > > similar on my nodes. Maybe there's a leak in the minrelaytxfee code path? > > Has anyone else seen something similar? > > I suggest running it in valgrind with --leak-check=full for 10 minutes. > > valgrind --leak-check=full src/bitcoind 2>&1 | tee out > > This at least will show you any memory leaks at exit. > Naturally, the leaks you observe may just be design issues where cache can > grow to much and when the cache is cleaned on shutdown you won't see it in > the > valgrind output. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "bitcoin-xt" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to bitcoin-xt+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > --001a1141fb902e200405220cece2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Leaks are not the only explanation possible. Caches and frag= mentation can also give this sort of effect. Unfortunately the tools to deb= ug this aren't great. You could try a build with tcmalloc and use it to= investigate heap stats.

Odinn, trolling like a 3 year old will get you swiftly banne= d. Last warning.

On 14 Oct 2015 9:58 am, "Tom Zander" &= lt;tomz@freedommail.ch> wrote= :
On Tuesday 13 Oct = 2015 14:56:08 Jonathan Toomim=C2=A0 via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Does anybody have any guesses where we might be leaking memory, or wha= t is
> using the additional 2.4 GB? I've been using minrelaytxfee=3D0.000= 03 or
> similar on my nodes. Maybe there's a leak in the minrelaytxfee cod= e path?
> Has anyone else seen something similar?

I suggest running it in valgrind with --leak-check=3Dfull for 10 minutes.
=C2=A0 valgrind --leak-check=3Dfull src/bitcoind 2>&1 | tee out

This at least will show you any memory leaks at exit.
Naturally, the leaks you observe may just be design issues where cache can<= br> grow to much and when the cache is cleaned on shutdown you won't see it= in the
valgrind output.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;bitcoin-xt" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bitcoi= n-xt+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--001a1141fb902e200405220cece2--