[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak
From: |
arnold |
Subject: |
Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak |
Date: |
Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:21:22 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Heirloom mailx 12.4 7/29/08 |
"Andrew J. Schorr" <address@hidden> wrote:
> FYI, I ran this on the small 344-record dataset like so:
>
> tail -n +2 sample4gnu.pip | valgrind --leak-check=full
> --log-file=valgrind.log gawk -f test.awk
>
> I then ran it on the first 200 records like so:
>
> tail -n +2 sample4gnu.pip | head -200 | valgrind --leak-check=full
> --log-file=valgrind.log.200 gawk -f test.awk
>
> The logfiles are attached.
>
> Regards,
> Andy
Thanks. I note that there are no 'definitely lost' leaks. I tend to
mistrust the 'possibly lost' reports as fals positives, but I'm willing
to put some time in reviewing the code.
Arnold
- [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Stephane Delsert, 2017/03/27
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, arnold, 2017/03/27
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Andrew J. Schorr, 2017/03/27
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Stephane Delsert, 2017/03/27
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, arnold, 2017/03/28
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Andrew J. Schorr, 2017/03/28
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak,
arnold <=
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Andrew J. Schorr, 2017/03/28
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Stephane Delsert, 2017/03/29
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Andrew J. Schorr, 2017/03/29
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, arnold, 2017/03/29
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, arnold, 2017/03/30
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Andrew J. Schorr, 2017/03/30
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Stephane Delsert, 2017/03/30
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Andrew J. Schorr, 2017/03/30
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Stephane Delsert, 2017/03/30
- Re: [bug-gawk] Memory leak, Andrew J. Schorr, 2017/03/30