Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/07/27/18:17:38
Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>>>>$ ./inter.pl
>>>>>perl> sub foo($){$a=shift;foo($a+1);}
>
> You do realize you have infinite recursion here, right?
Sure.
>>>>Segmentation fault (core dumped)
> And this is Windows saying "I don't think so". :-)
:-)
>>>I don't know. Maybe it is a Windows feature that applications running
>>>out of memory are crashing?
>>
>>But there's plenty of memory left when perl crashes. I have 1 GB RAM and
>>1 GB swap file.
>
> IIRC, unless you specifically increase heap_chunk_in_mb, Cygwin will only
> use 384M of address space (which seems consistent with the sbrk() and the
> request size above).
I thought of that. However:
$ cat foo.c
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(int argc, char * argv[]){
int i;
char * ptrs[1024];
for(i = 0; i < atoi(argv[2]); ++i){
ptrs[i] = malloc(1024 * 1024 * atoi(argv[1]));
memset(ptrs[i], 'a', 1024 * 1024 * atoi(argv[1]));
}
sleep(10);
}
$ ./foo 200 5
$ ./foo 800 1
$ ./foo 2 500
I've been using more than 384 MB in C and C++ in Cygwin for a long time.
Why heap_chunk_in_mb would affect Perl, but not C?
>>I've simplified the test case. It seems that Cygwin perl can't handle
>>too much memory. For instance:
>>
>>$ perl -e '$a="a"x(200 * 1024 * 1024); sleep 9'
>>
>>OK, this could have failed because $a might require 200 MB of continuous
>>space.
>
> Actually, $a requires *more* than 200MB of continuous space. Perl
> characters are 2 bytes, so you're allocating at least 400MB of space!
Right, UTF. I completely forgot about that.
> FWIW, the above doesn't fail for me, but then, I have heap_chunk_in_mb set
> to 1024. :-)
I'll try that in a while.
>>But hashes don't, do they? Then why does the following code fail?
>>
>>$ perl -e '$a="a"x(1024 * 1024);my %b; $b{$_}=$a for(1..400);sleep 9'
>
> Wow. You're copying a 2MB string 400 times. No wonder this fails. It
> would fail with larger heap sizes as well. :-)
>
> This works with no problems and very little memory usage, FWIW:
>
> $ perl -e '$a="a"x(1024 * 1024);my %b; $b{$_}=\$a for(1..400);sleep 9'
I didn't use references on purpose. I wanted to avoid the problem that
arrays require continuous space, so using an array to measure system memory
capacity is inaccurate. On the other hand, hash is a pointer structure (at
least I think so), so it should work with fragmented memory.
I don't see why "no wonder it fails", unless it's a reference to
aforementioned heap_chunk_in_mb.
>>Or that one?
>>
>>$ perl -e '$a="a"x(50 * 1024 * 1024);$b=$a;$c=$a;$d=$a;$e=$a;sleep 10'
>
> Yep, let's see. 100MB * 5 = 500MB. Since Cygwin perl by default can only
> use 384MB, the result is pretty predictable. Perl shouldn't segfault,
> though -- that's a bug, IMO.
Should I do anything about it?
>>On linux there's no such problem - perl can use all available memory.
>
> Yeah. Set heap_chunk_in_mb to include all available memory, and I'm sure
> you'll find that Cygwin perl works the same too. However, you might want
> to read some Perl documentation too, to make sure your data structure size
> calculations are correct, and that your expectations are reasonable.
Thanks for being so helpful. That really explans a lot. Thanks to Dave and
Gerrit, too.
Krzysztof Duleba
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -