In order to check our web application for memory leaks, I run a machine which does the following:
it runs automated End-to-End tests over (almost) the entire application in Chrome
after each block of tests, it goes to a state of the web application where almost nothing happens
it triggers gc(); for garbage collection
it saves totalJSHeapSize, and usedJSHeapSize to a file
it plots out the results for each test run to a graph
That way, we can see how much the memory increases and which are the problematic parts of our application: At some point the memory increases, at some point it decreases.
Till yesterday, it looked like this:
Bright red (upper line): totalJSHeapSize, light red (lower line): usedJSHeapSize
Yesterday, I updated Chrome to version 69. And now the chart looks quite different:
The start and end amount of memory used (usedJSHeapSize) is almost the same. But as you can clearly see, the way it changes over the course of the test (ca. 1,5h) is quite different.
My questions are now:
Is this a change in reality or in measurement? I.e. did Chrome change its memory handling? Or just the way it puts out memory values via totalJSHeapSize, and usedJSHeapSize?
Concerning memory leaks, is it good news or bad news for me? Like: Before I had dozens of spots where memory increases, now I have just three. Is this true? Or are the memory leaks in the now flat areas still there and hidden?
I'm also thankful for any background information on how Chrome changed its memory measurement.
Some additional info:
The VM runs under KUbuntu 18.04
It's a single web page application done with AngularJS 1.6
The outcome of the memory measurement is quite stable - both before and after the update of Chrome
EDIT:
It seems this was a bug of Chrome version 69. At least, with an update to Chrome 70, this strange behavior is gone and everything looks almost as before.
I don't think you should be worry about it. This can happen due to the memory manager used inside the chrome. You didn't mentioned the version of your first memory graph, possibility that the memory manager used between these two version is different. Chrome was using the TCMalloc which take the large chunk of memory from the OS and manage it, once the memory shortage happenned with TCMalloc then it ask again a big chunk of memory from OS and start managing it. So the later graph what you are seeing have less up and downs (but bigger then previous one) due to that. Hope it answered your query.
As you mentioned that
The outcome of the memory measurement is quite stable - both before and after the update of Chrome
You don't need to really worry about it, the way previously chrome was allocating memory and how it does with new version is different(possible different memory manager) that's it.
Related
My React app does not have a mem leak, it has remained open for weeks with a steady mem consumption.
However, when let in the background or if I lock my windows session for a couple of days, the memory builds up quite a bit.
It gets back to normal quickly when I bring it back in the foreground though.
I very much suspect some rendering that gets queued, but not sure how to put my finger on the exact detail.
How can I analyze the issue in a structured way?
Using Version 48.0.2564.109 m.
We have a javascript web app (built with ExtJS). In Chrome, when we leave our app sitting there for a while, the GC starts going nuts. In Task Manager, you can see the CPU constantly spinning around 25%.
I took timeline snapshots and CPU profiles, and you can see the GC, about 10 times a seconds, try to collect memory, but collects 0B.
Our app is a large enterprise application and does use quite a bit of memory and updates the screen periodically.
But, there is absolutely no javascript code running during this time. So I can't see that it is something our app is actively doing
Does anyone know what could be triggering this?
It is killing performance of our app.
Also, it only happens when our tab is active. If you switch to a different tab, the CPU dies down and the GC stops.
Is there other data I need to collect to help determine this?
What is your app current JS heap size? You can check it by collecting timeline and enabling memory check box.
It looks like your app is close to the V8 memory limit, so V8 is trying to free some memory. If it is expected for the app to use that much memory, you can increase the limit on your host with something like: --js-flags="--max-old-space-size=2048"
Otherwise it might be just a memory leak in your code. Use heap profiler to hunt it down.
I'm using the Profiles tab in the Chrome developer tools to record memory heap snapshots. My app has a memory leak, so I'm expecting the snapshots to gradually increase in size, which they do. But for reasons I don't understand, the first snapshot is always artificially large... creating a seemingly deceptive drop in memory between the first and second. All subsequent snapshots gradually increase as expected.
I know there is often extra memory used at the beginning of a page load, due to caching and other setup. But the same thing happens no matter when I take the first snapshot. It could be 30 seconds after the page is loaded or 30 minutes. Same pattern. My only guess is that the profile tool its self is interacting with the memory somehow, but that seems like a stretch.
Any ideas what's going on here?
Right before memory snapshot is taken Chrome tries to collect the garbage. It doesn't collect it thoroughly though, it only does a predefined number of passes (this magic number seems to be 7). Therefore, when the first snapshot is taken there still might be some uncollected garbage left.
Before making a first snapshot try going to the "Timeline" tab and forcing garbage collection manually.
From what I've tested, this always reduces the size of the first snapshot.
While attached to debugger it runs just fine. The Periodic Task is invoked and runs over and over, but when I deploy it to my device It seems to run 1-2 times and then stops.
What It does is setting the live tile background image from isolated storage. The images are created in the application and then saved to isolated storage. As mentioned it works well while attached to the debugger.
The only constraint I could think that could break it would be the memory cap. The application creates and saves 40 images of ~25kB each, and that isn't 1 MB! The application is maybe <4 MB, so that is 5 MB... a lot less than the 11 MB minimal requirement.
So it can't be the memory cap kicking in. Two consecutive unhandled crashes should also break the task, but I've thrown all the code in the task's OnInvoke() in a try/catch.
Now I'm out of ideas what stopping my periodic task when running without being connected to visual studio running in debugger. Any clues?
Firstly are you using Windows 8.1 phone by any chance? Since there is an issue with Periodic tasks do not run on windows phone 8.1 devices as you can see on this forum
Background agent can’t use more than 6MB of memory. You can get the current memory usage using the following snippet :
var memory = DeviceStatus.ApplicationMemoryUsageLimit
- DeviceStatus.ApplicationCurrentMemoryUsage;
automatically executed by the OS each 30 minutes
the operation can’t exceed 25 seconds per run
if the phone switch to battery saver mode the background agent may not be executed
on some devices only 6 background agents may be planned simultaneously
agents can’t use more that 6MB of memory
agents have to be re-planned each 2 weeks
an agent that crashes two times is automatically disabled by the system
Periodic tasks are unscheduled after two consecutive crashes. You need to make sure that this doesn't happen (check internet connectivity if required, set a timeout on web requests, etc.).
You should place your code in a try/catch block and log exceptions in the Isolated Storage to see what happened afterwards.
Here is the list of constraints that apply on scheduled agents (MSDN): Constraints for all Scheduled Task Types
Here is also a series of blog posts that could help you: Windows Phone: Background Agents Pitfalls
Have you actually measured and logged the memory that's being used? What you're saying isn't very correct:
When the background agent starts it has already taken 5-6MB to load what it needs from the .NET framework.
If you mean that the compressed files are 25KB each, you should know that the images in the memory are not compressed (at least not that much).
There are two things you can try:
Use this property and check the peak memory usage: DeviceStatus.ApplicationPeakMemoryUsage. Write it to some file (maybe every 5 images or so) and check if it's okay. Paste the results, please.
Note: When testing the memory usage, it's best to build the app in "Release" and run it without debugging on a device. That's most accurate. There are some minor variations, so you should run the agent several times to be sure it's working within the limits. You can force start it from the app using ScheduledActionService.LaunchForTest.
Also, I'd suggest you subscribe to the Application.Current.UnhandledException event and mark all exceptions as handled (and log them, so that you can fix them). That's for extra safety.
P.S. When the background agent stops executing, is it "blocked" in the list of background tasks on the device?
While unit profiling my classes I noticed that the String class endlessly accumulates (eating up over 90% of the memory in my sizable app). Luckily this is only while running in Profiler mode of Flash Builder 4.6. In debug or deployment (as AIR) memory usage levels off as expected using embedded on-screen memory profilier (Mr Doobs Stats).
To verify I made a test app that was simply a URLLoader continuously loading a text file. When running in Profilier mode using URLLoaderDataFormat.String the String data is never GC'd and grows continuously whereas using URLLoaderDataFormat.BINARY the data is nearly immediately GC'd and stays level.
I hesitate to call this a bug, because possibly it's necessary part of the way the Profilier works… but perhaps this is abnormal for the Profiler? This is the essence of my StackOverflow inquiry.
At any rate, this burned up a couple work-days for me, so if you're Googling wondering why the String class is growing like crazy and never getting GC'd consider measuring your apps memory usage outside the Profilier to verify. In my case I was mislead into thinking I had run into some problem with Master Strings — though it's good understand Master Strings and their impact on memory (see:) don't get mislead like I did.