This is the mail archive of the archer@sourceware.org mailing list for the Archer project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:14 AM, Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com> wrote: > In case I missed something in my environment, can you please apply and test > it for results? My results with the patch and following the 100 loops of the > test are: > > ==10830== LEAK SUMMARY: > ==10830== ? ?definitely lost: 251,999 bytes in 7,867 blocks. > ==10830== ? ?indirectly lost: 1,600 bytes in 38 blocks. > ==10830== ? ? ?possibly lost: 57,232 bytes in 209 blocks. > ==10830== ? ?still reachable: 13,411,291 bytes in 29,753 blocks. > ==10830== ? ? ? ? suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks. > > Still some work left to do, I think. But I'm curious if your results will > match mine with this one patch. Looks much better :-) Here is what I see after your patch: ==19223== LEAK SUMMARY: ==19223== definitely lost: 251,524 bytes in 7,850 blocks. ==19223== indirectly lost: 964 bytes in 22 blocks. ==19223== possibly lost: 14,739 bytes in 152 blocks. ==19223== still reachable: 31,967,450 bytes in 30,236 blocks. ==19223== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks. My final VG error summary attached (in case it differs from what you see). -- Paul Pluzhnikov
Attachment:
vg.out-20090225-2.txt
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |