Search Results

Search found 672 results on 27 pages for 'gc'.

Page 19/27 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • VB.net: Custom ' TODO: List on an Interface

    - by Shiftbit
    How do I add my own todo and comments list to appear on Interfaces? I want it to pop up like IDisposable does: Public Class Foo : Implements IDisposable Private disposedValue As Boolean = False ' To detect redundant calls ' IDisposable Protected Overridable Sub Dispose(ByVal disposing As Boolean) If Not Me.disposedValue Then If disposing Then ' TODO: free other state (managed objects). End If ' TODO: free your own state (unmanaged objects). ' TODO: set large fields to null. End If Me.disposedValue = True End Sub #Region " IDisposable Support " ' This code added by Visual Basic to correctly implement the disposable pattern. Public Sub Dispose() Implements IDisposable.Dispose ' Do not change this code. Put cleanup code in Dispose(ByVal disposing As Boolean) above. Dispose(True) GC.SuppressFinalize(Me) End Sub #End Region End Class Whenever I enter my own comments and todo list they are never autogenerated like IDisposable Interface does. I would like my own Interfaces to preserve the comments so that I can share my Interfaces with in source documentation.

    Read the article

  • How do you Remove an Invalid Remote Branch Reference from Git?

    - by Casey
    In my current repo I have the following output: $ git branch -a * master remotes/origin/master remotes/public/master I want to delete 'remotes/public/master' from the branch list: $ git branch -d remotes/public/master error: branch 'remotes/public/master' not found. Also, the output of 'git remote' is strange, since it does not list 'public': $ git remote show origin How can I delete 'remotes/public/master' from the branch list? Update, tried the 'git push' command: $ git push public :master fatal: 'public' does not appear to be a git repository fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly Solution: The accepted answer had the solution at the bottom! git gc --prune=now

    Read the article

  • Why isn't my Ruby object deleted when the last reference goes out of scope?

    - by Andrew Clegg
    Hi gurus, I've found a weird effect when trying to track down a memory leak in a Rails app. Can anyone explain what's going on here? Save this script as a plain Ruby script (Rails not necessary): class Fnord def to_s 'fnord' end end def test f = Fnord.new end test GC.start sleep 2 ObjectSpace.each_object do |o| puts o if o.is_a? Fnord end When I run this via ruby 1.8.7 (2009-06-12 patchlevel 174) [i486-linux] I get the following: bash $ ruby var_test fnord Although the variable f is out of scope, there are no other references to the single Fnord object, and I've garbage collected, the object still seems to exist. Is this a nefarious memory leak of some sort, or am I completely missing something about Ruby? Further, if I change the test method to this: def test f = Fnord.new f = nil end I get no output. But surely this should not change the semantics here? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • main content wrapper div get's pushed down the page in IE

    - by Blankman
    I have a 2 column layout, with the left side for navigation and the right side for the main content. The right side content has a wrapper div that looks like: Now this looks fine in FF and GC, and it IE but if I change the padding to anything over 4px that section gets pushed down below the left navigation. #content { padding:3px; // 4 makes it get pushed down } Does this mean IE has a different way of calculating the width of all my elements? Is this a common problem that has a solution for it?

    Read the article

  • StringBuilder/StringBuffer vs. "+" Operator

    - by matt.seil
    I'm reading "Better, Faster, Lighter Java" (by Bruce Tate and Justin Gehtland) and am familiar with the readability requirements in agile type teams, such as what Robert Martin discusses in his clean coding books. On the team I'm on now, I've been told explicitly not to use the "+" operator because it creates extra (and unnecessary) string objects during runtime. But this article: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp01274.html Written back in '04 talks about how object allocation is about 10 machine instructions. (essentially free) It also talks about how the GC also helps to reduce costs in this environment. What is the actual performance tradeoffs between using "+," "StringBuilder," or "StringBuffer?" (In my case it is StringBuffer only as we are limited to Java 1.4.2.) StringBuffer to me results in ugly, less readable code, as a couple of examples in Tate's book demonstrates. And StringBuffer is thread-synchronized which seems to have its own costs that outweigh the "danger" in using the "+" operator. Thoughts/Opinions?

    Read the article

  • Garbage Collection Java

    - by simion
    On the slides i am revising from it says the following; Live objects can be identified either by maintaining a count of the number of references to each object, or by tracing chains of references from the roots. Reference counting is expensive – it needs action every time a reference changes and it doesn’t spot cyclical structures, but it can reclaim space incrementally. Tracing involves identifying live objects only when you need to reclaim space – moving the cost from general access to the time at which the GC runs, typically only when you are out of memory. I understand the principles of why reference counting is expensive but do not understand what "doesn’t spot cyclical structures, but it can reclaim space incrementally." means. Could anyone help me out a little bit please? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to detect Out Of Memory condition?

    - by Jaromir Hamala
    I have an application running on Websphere Application Server 6.0 and it crashes nearly every day because of Out-Of-Memory. From verbose GC is certain there are the memory leaks(many of them) Unfortunately the application is provided by external vendor and getting things fixed is slow & painful process. As part of the process I need to gather the logs and heapdumps each time the OOM occurs. Now I'm looking for some way how to automate it. Fundamental problem is how to detect OOM condition. One way would be to create shell script which will periodically search for new heapdumps. This approach seems me a kinda dirty. Another approach might be to leverage the JMX somehow. But I have little or no experience in this area and don't have much idea how to do it. Or is in WAS some kind of trigger/hooks for this? Thank you very much for every advice!

    Read the article

  • Performance implications of finalizers on JVM

    - by Alexey Romanov
    According to this post, in .Net, Finalizers are actually even worse than that. Besides that they run late (which is indeed a serious problem for many kinds of resources), they are also less powerful because they can only perform a subset of the operations allowed in a destructor (e.g., a finalizer cannot reliably use other objects, whereas a destructor can), and even when writing in that subset finalizers are extremely difficult to write correctly. And collecting finalizable objects is expensive: Each finalizable object, and the potentially huge graph of objects reachable from it, is promoted to the next GC generation, which makes it more expensive to collect by some large multiple. Does this also apply to JVMs in general and to HotSpot in particular?

    Read the article

  • Singelton on iPhone Simulator vs Singelton on real Device

    - by Helge Becker
    I am using a Singelton for some shared stuff. In the simulator, the app crashes ocasionally. Tracking the crash down shows that the the properties of my Singelton became dealocated. Those crashes never happend on a real device. Does the iPHone simulator handle memory managemend different? GC maybe? Changed the singelton to match this pattern. The iPhone Simulator dont crash now, but I am not sure about the memory handling on the real device. I assume that this solution will cause problems. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • Retain cycle on `self` with blocks

    - by Jonathan Sterling
    I'm afraid this question is pretty basic, but I think it's relevant to a lot of Objective-C programmers who are getting into blocks. What I've heard is that since blocks capture local variables referenced within them as const copies, using self within a block can result in a retain cycle, should that block be copied. So, we are supposed to use __block to force the block to deal directly with self instead of having it copied. __block typeof(self) bself = self; [someObject messageWithBlock:^{ [bself doSomething]; }]; instead of just [someObject messageWithBlock:^{ [self doSomething]; }]; What I'd like to know is the following: if this is true, is there a way that I can avoid the ugliness (aside from using GC)?

    Read the article

  • WPF: How to efficiently update an Image 30 times per second

    - by John
    Hello, I'm writing a WPF application that uses a component, and this component returns a pointer (IntPtr) to pixels of a bitmap (stride * height). I know in advance that the bitmap is a 24bits rgb, its width and height. Updating the Image control with these bitmaps makes up a video to the user, but I'm not sure what's the most efficient way to do that, most of the time the CPU usage goes to 75%+ and memory changing from 40mb to 500mb and the nI think GC starts to work and then it drops again to 40mm. The app starts to not be responsive. What shoud I do? thanks!

    Read the article

  • C# compile finalize method's on runtime?

    - by Royi Namir
    As im reading through 3 books about GC , ive notice some strange fact : C# via CLR CriticalFinalizerObject : the CLR treats this class and classes derived from it in a very special manner what ??? "not find enough memory to COMPILE a method? " IMHO - the code should be already compiled... no ? when Im writing c# code - the whole code is compiled to IL before its running... no? but according to the text - at RUNTIME - he MAY find insufficient memory for compile... Help ?

    Read the article

  • Garbage Collection in Java

    - by simion
    On the slides I am revising from it says the following: Live objects can be identified either by maintaining a count of the number of references to each object, or by tracing chains of references from the roots. Reference counting is expensive – it needs action every time a reference changes and it doesn’t spot cyclical structures, but it can reclaim space incrementally. Tracing involves identifying live objects only when you need to reclaim space – moving the cost from general access to the time at which the GC runs, typically only when you are out of memory. I understand the principles of why reference counting is expensive but do not understand what "doesn’t spot cyclical structures, but it can reclaim space incrementally." means. Could anyone help me out a little bit please? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Memory leak with ContextMenuStrip

    - by Dave
    I'm creating a lot of custom controls and adding them to a FlowLayoutPanel. There is also a ContextMenuStrip created and populated at design time. Every time a control is added to the panel it has its ContextMenuStrip property assigned to this menu, so that all controls "share" the same menu. But I noticed when the controls are removed from the panel and disposed of, the memory in use in Task Manager doesn't drop. It rises around 50kB every time a control is created and added to the layout panel. I downloaded the trial of .NET Memory Profiler and it showed there were references to the menu strip hanging around after the controls were disposed. I changed the code to explicitly set the ContextMenuStrip property to null before disposing of the control, and yep, the memory is now released. Why is this? Shouldn't the GC clean up this type of thing?

    Read the article

  • How does c# type safety affect the garbage collection?

    - by Indeera
    I'm dealing with code that handles large buffers ( 100MB) and manipulation of these is done in unsafe blocks. I'd like to refactor these to avoid unsafe code. I'm wondering about the likely memory performance gains (positive/negative/neutral) before I embark on that. I assert that if the compiler can verify types, it could possibly generate better code and that could also mean good GC performance. Is this a valid assertion? What is your experience? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • About the String#substring() method

    - by alain.janinm
    If we take a look at the String#substring method implementation : new String(offset + beginIndex, endIndex - beginIndex, value); We see that a new String is created with the same original content (parameter char [] value). So the workaround is to use new String(toto.substring(...)) to drop the reference to the original char[] value and make it eligible for GC (if no more references exist). I would like to know if there is a special reason that explain this implementation. Why the method doesn't create herself the new shorter String and why she keeps the full original value instead? The other related question is : should we always use new String(...) when dealing with substring?

    Read the article

  • overview/history of resident memory usage

    - by kapet
    I have a fairly complicated program (Python with SWIG'ed C++ code, long running server) that shows a constantly growing resident memory usage. I've been digging with the usual tools for the leak (valgrind, Pythons gc module, etc.) but to no avail so far. I'm a bit afraid that the actual problem is memory fragmentation within Python and/or libc managed memory. Anyway, my question is more specific right now: Is there a tool to visualize resident memory usage and ideally show how it develops over time? I think the raw data is in /proc/$PID/smaps but I was hoping there's some tool that shows me a nice graph of the amounts used by mmap'ed files vs. anonymous mmap'ed memory vs. heap over time so that it's easier to see (literally) what's changing. I couldn't find anything though. Does anybody know of a ready to use tool that graphs memory usage over space and time in an intuitive way?

    Read the article

  • C++ Variable declarable in function body, but not class member?

    - by anon
    I want to create a C++ class with the following type: It can be declared inside of a function. It can be declared inside of a member function. It can not be declared as a class member. The use of this: think "Root" objects for a GC. Is this possible in C++? In particular, I'm using g++. Willing to switch to clang. Either templates or macro solution fine. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How can I disable Java garbage collector ?

    - by Nelson
    Hi, we have a PHP webapp that calls a java binary to produce a pdf report (with jasperreport), the java binary outpus pdf to standart output and exits, the php then send the pdf to browser. This java command lasts about 3 to 6 seconds, I think when it lasts 6 second it's because the GC kicks in, so I would like to disable it because anyway when the command exits all memory is returned.. I would like to know how to disable it for Java 1.4.2 and for Java 1.6.0 because we are currently testing both JVM to see which performs faster.. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Java memory usage increases when App is used, but doesnt decrease when not being used.

    - by gren
    I have a java application that uses a lot of memory when used, but when the program is not being used, the memory usage doesnt go down. Is there a way to force Java to release this memory? Because this memory is not needed at that time, I can understand to reserve a small amount of memory, but Java just reserves all the memory it ever uses. It also reuses this memory later but there must be a way to force Java to release it when its not needed. System.gc is not working.

    Read the article

  • Objective C memory leaking

    - by Jakub Lédl
    Hi everyone, I'm creating one Cocoa application for myself and I found a problem. I have two NSTextFields and they're connected to each other as nextKeyViews. When I run this app with memory leaks detection tool and tab through those 2 textboxes for a while, enter some text etc., I start to leak memory. It shows me that the AppKit library is responsible, the leaked objects are NSCFStrings and the responsible frames are [NSEvent charactersIgnoringModifiers] and [NSApplication nextEventMatchingMask:untilDate:inMode:dequeue:]. I know this is quite a brief and incomplete description, but does anyone have any ideas what could be the problem? Also, I don't use GC, so I release my instance variables in the controllers dealloc. What about the outlets? Since IBOutlet is just a mark for Interface Builder and doesn't actually mean anything, should I release them too?

    Read the article

  • CALayer not obeying object ownership rules?

    - by eaigner
    I have a custom CALayer - UIProgressLayer - for simulating a progress bar. There is a dispatched GC timer involved to animate its intermediate state. So thats the layer I'm talking about here, although i don't think the problem is restricted to this particular subclass because a CALayer with only the -release and -dealloc overridden produces the same outcome. The problem is when i send this layer, for instance, a theLayer.opacity = 0.5f a -release message is sent to the layer, thus deallocating my layer. Why is this happening? Has it something to do with how the whole CA system works? But it still has to obey the object ownership rules right? I was thinking maybe it creates a copy of that layer for the fading, but that's not the case.

    Read the article

  • Best way to reuse a Runnable

    - by Gandalf
    I have a class that implements Runnable and am currently using an Executor as my thread pool to run tasks (indexing documents into Lucene). executor.execute(new LuceneDocIndexer(doc, writer)); My issue is that my Runnable class creates many Lucene Field objects and I would rather reuse them then create new ones every call. What's the best way to reuse these objects (Field objects are not thread safe so I cannot simple make them static) - should I create my own ThreadFactory? I notice that after a while the program starts to degrade drastically and the only thing I can think of is it's GC overhead. I am currently trying to profile the project to be sure this is even an issue - but for now lets just assume it is.

    Read the article

  • C# Asynchronous Sockets questions.

    - by ccppjava
    Based on my reading and testing, with asynchronous sockets, the socket itself can be passed using state object (IAsyncResult result), also if store the socket as a private field, it would be captured by the callback methods. I am wondering how the IAysnResult is kepted between the BeginXXX and ReceiveXXX? It looks to me that after the BeginXXX call and the method ends, the state object would be disposed by GC if there is no reference to it. In the case of private field, how the private field is shared between threads? (As far as I know, a callback is executed using a thread from the default thread pool, which would be considered as a new thread.) Many thanks, hope the questions themselves are clear.

    Read the article

  • Are spinlocks a good choice for a memory allocator?

    - by dsimcha
    I've suggested to the maintainers of the D programming language runtime a few times that the memory allocator/garbage collector should use spinlocks instead of regular OS critical sections. This hasn't really caught on. Here are the reasons I think spinlocks would be better: At least in synthetic benchmarks that I did, it's several times faster than OS critical sections when there's contention for the memory allocator/GC lock. Edit: Empirically, using spinlocks didn't even have measurable overhead in a single-core environment, probably because locks need to be held for such a short period of time in a memory allocator. Memory allocations and similar operations usually take a small fraction of a timeslice, and even a small fraction of the time a context switch takes, making it silly to context switch in the case of contention. A garbage collection in the implementation in question stops the world anyhow. There won't be any spinning during a collection. Are there any good reasons not to use spinlocks in a memory allocator/garbage collector implementation?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >