dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 05:56:43PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> 
> 
> mspieg wrote:
> > 
> > On Feb 6, 2009, at 6:35 PM, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> > 
> >>
> >>
> >> mspieg wrote:
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>    I'm playing with some characteristic based advection schemes in 
> >>> Dolfin (0.9.0) which require a large number of discrete Function 
> >>> evals.  This seems to be leading to a large memory leak as the 
> >>> process grows considerably in size with every time-step.  I've put 
> >>> together a small (badly written) program that demonstrates the 
> >>> problem which I've tried to isolate just to IntersectionDetector (and 
> >>> the underlying GTS). I suspect the problem is in GTS, but thought I 
> >>> would start with Dolfin support.  Any thoughts/help greatly 
> >>> appreciated...
> >>
> >> I recall that quite some time ago some memory leaks were fixed in the 
> >> DOLFIN GTS interface, but there remained some GTS problems. Have you 
> >> run valgrind?
> > 
> > Thanks Garth,
> >    I've been developing on  mac OSX 10.4 which valgrind doesn't support 
> > (yet ?).  I can probably dig up a linux box and run valgrind (but if 
> > someone else can do it faster that would be great).  Apple has an 
> > application MallocDebug, which I've started playing with, but it seems 
> > to be choking on some of the libraries.  I'll let you know if I make any 
> > progress.  If anyone else has some insight or can easily run valgrind on 
> > this code (assuming that it develops the same memory issues under Linux 
> > as MacOSX), that would be great.
> > 
> 
> I think that I've fixed the leak (using top to view the memory use, it 
> now remains constant). I ran valgrind on the original code and it didn't 
> pick anything up but there was definitely a leak. GTS has an odd 
> interface which I would say contributed to the DOLFIN-side leak.
> 
> Garth

Nice. I was just about to look into it. Yes, the interface is a bit
strange. While we're at it, I'm not sure the destructor is correct.
I tried to figure out how to do it correctly and came up with

  gts_bb_tree_destroy(tree, true);

The other option would be

  gts_bb_tree_destroy(tree, false);

-- 
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature