incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From zhangjf <zhan...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [QA REPORT] After long-running GUI testing, memory leak is much less than before.
Date Tue, 24 Jul 2012 02:23:29 GMT
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
> <jogischmidt@googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 7/23/12 4:59 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 07/23/2012 12:20 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> >> On 7/23/12 5:11 AM, Linyi Li wrote:
>> >>> Hi all,
>> >>>
>> >>> Last week I did some long-running GUI testing on AOO 3.4, build
>> >>> r1359641,
>> >>> using Java on my ubuntu10.04.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>     - Here is my scenario:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. Create new Text Document/Spreadsheet/Presentation/Drawing.
>> >>> 2. Input some simple text in it.
>> >>> 3. Save and then reopen it.
>> >>> 4. Repeat the above steps.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>     - Here is the long-running report.
>> >>>
>> >>> 471 iterations, 61 hours, memory changed from 121168 KB to 809644
>> >>> KB,+1462KB
>> >>> per iteration.
>> >>>
>> >>> Comparing with the long-running test report on June 8[1], memory leak
>> is
>> >>> half of that time.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks to those who contributed to this. Hope memory leak will be
>> >>> less and
>> >>> less.
>> >>
>> >> thanks for the report and the good news, it's promising for the future
>> >>
>> >> Juergen
>> >
>> > Hi Linyi --
>> >
>> > Yes, thanks indeed for this good news. I marked this issue as "critical"
>> > yesterday.
>> >
>> > OK, maybe you can enlighten us. How would a "memory leak" get better
>> > exactly? Does this mean that AOO is doing something differently *now*,
>> > that is in the last few weeks, than it was when this was initially
>> > re-reported at the beginning of June?
>>
>> it is not one memory leak, we have have many leaks in different places
>> in the code.
>> And with fixing one of these issues the meta issue "memory leak" becomes
>> better if you want ;-)
>>
>> >
>> > And, according to Dennis's notes on issue 11934:
>> >
>> > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119341
>> >
>> > these kinds of problems have been around as early as version 1.1.
>> >
>> > I didn't see any changes in the commit logs in the last few weeks that
>> > would have directly addressed this.
>> >
>>
>> fixes in other areas, I think this special one is not yet addressed
>>
>> Juergen
>>

>
> OK, thanks...little by little I guess.
>
Exactly, it is the way it is working. And I believe this test only
shows a part of leaks. It still needs other use cases to show
different kinds of memory leaks. Perhaps checking existing memory leak
bugs which has specific steps is a good direction.

zhangjf
>
>
>>
>> > Your thoughts?
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> [1]
>> >>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Zhe Liu <aliuzhe@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Unfortunately,I lost  Mac data and forget the iteration count.
>> >>>> Fortunately, I also did the same test on Ubuntu:
>> >>>> 361 iterations,  48hours, memory changed from 122644KB to 1133668KB,
>> >>>> +2800KB per iteration.
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "I'm just a normal jerk who happens to make music.
>  As long as my brain and fingers work, I'm cool."
>                               -- Eddie Van Halen

Mime
View raw message