94.00 KB, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint
113.75 KB, image/jpeg
116.13 KB, image/jpeg
53.50 KB, image/jpeg
111.36 KB, image/jpeg
23.62 KB, text/plain
56.63 KB, image/jpeg
893 bytes, patch
Robert John Churchill: review+
jag (Peter Annema): superreview+
|Details | Diff | Splinter Review|
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.7+) Gecko/20020116 BuildID: 2002011604 During a specific bug search on http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/, Mozilla memory usage skyrocketed to approximately 200 megabytes! I am running Mozilla build 2002011604 on Windows 2000. My computer has 512 meg of memory. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.Launch Mozilla and navigate to http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ 2.Launch Windows Task Manager. Mozilla is using about 20 meg of memory. 3.Enter a forward slash (/) in the field entitled "Enter a bug # or some search terms". (I was searching for a bug whose error message begins with a slash). 4.Press the 'Show' button. 5.Go back to Windows Task Manager and watch Mozilla's memory consumption. 6.Memory rises steadily to about 40 - 50 meg until the browser displays the next page with the bug list. 7. After the browser displays the next page with the bug list, memory consumption CONTINUES to rise quickly and steadily. In a few seconds, Mozilla is using approximately 200 meg of memory! 8.Memory usage remains at about 200 meg long after the bug list is displayed. Actual Results: Memory usage quickly went from 20 meg to approximately 200 meg. Expected Results: Memory usage should have climbed slightly, but not nearly to 200 meg. I have done the exact same bug search using Netscape 6.2.1 and the Mozilla 0.9.7 monthly milestone build. In both cases, memory usage climbs to about 40 meg, and then levels off. It does not climb higher than 40 meg. This leak appears to have been introduced after the 0.9.7 Mozilla build. Although this situation (a bug search using a /) is uncommon, I believe that this bug is critical because it is indicative of a serious memory leak somewhere in browser processing.
wfm with win2k build 20020117.. (59MB RAM)
I can re-create this problem using build 2002011803. Also, I posted a message on the Mozilla newsgroup, and another user with W2K-SP2 / 512MB (and the latest nightly build as of this morning) was also able to re-create this problem. Perhaps the problem has something to do with the fact that our PCs have 512 MB of RAM.
no, my system have also 512BM RAM BTW: I can't see your screenshot because I don't have PPT and many other people can't see it because they use linux..
Created attachment 65790 [details] Here is a JPG screenshot of the memory leak If you check the netscape.public.mozilla.browser newsgroup for today (1/19/02) at about 12:05 PM, you will see where I posted this problem. Someone with the same machine configuration as mine responded that Mozilla was at 213MB when they followed the steps listed in this bug.
This is *not* mozilla's fault. If anything, it /might/ be bugzilla's. you search probably resulted in a pull of all bugs you can read in the database. [nc4 top output] Bug List Sat Jan 19 18:48:13 PST 2002 This list is too long for bugzilla's little mind; the Next/Prev/First/Last buttons won't appear.
Assignee: asa → justdave
Component: Browser-General → Bugzilla-General
Product: Browser → Bugzilla
QA Contact: doronr → matty
Summary: Enormous Memory Leak During Bug Search → Quick Search for / results in ... list is too long for bugzilla's little mind
Version: other → 2.15
Created attachment 65796 [details] JPG screenshot of the same Bugzilla search using Netscape 6.2.1 If this is * Not * the fault of Mozilla, then why does Netscape 6.2.1 use only 40 MB of memory when doing the exact same search? (As illustrated by the third attachment) The search done with NS 6.2.1 used the same Bugzilla processing and returned the same number of bugs. The only difference was the version of the browser. I have also done the same search using Mozilla 0.9.7 (monthly milestone), and it tops off at 50 MB even though Bugzilla returns the same number of bugs and (presumably) performs the same processing.
per additional information provided by the reporter I concur that he is complaining about a Mozilla issue, not a Bugzilla one. The "list is too big for Bugzilla's little mind" message isn't what he's complaining about. The amount of memory used by the browser to process the returned data is what he's complaining about (specifically, a 160 MB difference in memory usage between NC 6.2.1 and the current Mozilla for the same data). Moving back to Browser...
Assignee: justdave → asa
Component: Bugzilla-General → Browser-General
Product: Bugzilla → Browser
QA Contact: matty → doronr
Summary: Quick Search for / results in ... list is too long for bugzilla's little mind → Enormous memory leak during bug search
Version: 2.15 → other
Reproduced on build 2002011604, Win2k. Confirming.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
this also occurs on Linux(Debian/woody, Gnome 1.4)with build 20020115. Memory usage as measured by top(s=0.5) jumps 160M after the bug list finishes loading in 20-30M increments. Presumably since the page has finished loading Mozilla shouldn't be doing anything computationally/memory intensive.
not a leak, just a high memory usage. Over to Layout folks.
Assignee: asa → karnaze
Component: Browser-General → HTMLTables
QA Contact: doronr → amar
Summary: Enormous memory leak during bug search → Enormous memory usage during bug search
Created attachment 68020 [details] my mem usage on win2k for same query for what its worth, my screenshot of my memusage for this query (35 megs).
markling this bug WFM on win2k. i use up 35 megs (see attachemnt screenshot).
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
The steps still reproduce the bug with today's Mozilla trunk build from 2002-02-04-09 under W2K SP2 with a completely new profile. It might be related to parsing the bug list for the sidebar, and this feature might not be in Netscape branches. Note also that Moz now crashes sometimes as the memory is sucked up. See talkback ID: TB2554040H
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WORKSFORME → ---
Created attachment 68039 [details] Mozilla memory usage at 203 meg. after search As the attachment I am submitting shows, Mozilla memory is still at 203 meg following this search. As the attachment indicates, I am using Mozilla build 2002020409. Please note (from the attachment) that Task Manager shows Mozilla.exe at 203,324K. I looked at attachment number 68020, and noticed that netscap6.exe (not Mozilla.exe) is using 35 MB. This search does not use high memory on Netscape 6.2.1. But it does use very high memory on Mozilla. Something must have changed since the branch was created for Netscape 6.2.1.
In a second tabbed browser, I followed the instructions and mozilla's memory usage only rose from about 50MB to 60MB. I am running Windows XP Home, mozilla build 2002021303, 512 MB RAM, 60 GB HD.
I reran my original test and a couple others using build 2002021503. All tests used Win 2K, 512MB, and non-tabbed browsing. For each test, I launched the browser prior to the test, so that the initial memory footprint would start at the same size for all tests. Here are the results: Initial memory footprint: 19.5 MB Bugzilla search on a forward slash (/): Memory footprint after search: 35 MB Bugs found: 2,156 Bugzilla search on the word 'mail': Memory footprint after search: 53 MB Bugs found: 4,890 Bugzilla search on the word 'a': Memory footprint after search: 152 MB Bugs found: 21,696 I also ran the same tests using NS 6.2.1, and the memory footprints after corresponding searches were similar. In fact, the Mozilla footprint was a bit smaller after all searches! The initial problem I reported seems to have been solved. Please close this bug if you feel appropriate. And please let me know if there is anything I can do to help. Thanks.
Sorry, but this isn't fixed with yesterday's nightly under W2K. The issue is that showing the bug list in the Search sidebar that is a memory hog, not the page rendering itself. Please test again with a recent nightly build with the sidebar showing, and have the search tab open with "Open the Search tab in the sidebar when search results are available" checked in the search prefs. When I do this, I get 110+ MB of memory usage with a brand-new profile. Most of the consuming comes after the page is rendered, which again points to the search tab as the culprit. Hiding the search tab or hiding the sidebar after this jump doesn't decrease memory usage. Note that the same search when the sidebar was never shown doesn't result in high memory usage.
I set my preferences to 'Open the Search tab in the sidebar when search results are available', but it is not working. Either I have a corrupted file somewhere or there is a bug in build 2002021503. I will try again on Monday with another build. In the meantime, could you send a screenshot (JPG) so I can see what your browser screen looks like when this problem occurs? Thanks.
I was browsing some bugs changed in the last few days when I noticed this one. I noticed before that Mozilla became unresponsive for a good while after the page loading had apparently completed and sidebar was being displayed. Of course I had to check the memory usage now. 170 megs... Build 20020214 Win2K.
*** Bug 129985 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Is this related to bug 98835?
*** Bug 139447 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This has sent my machine into terminal swap storm a couple of times necessitating a sysrq-k to kill X ...
OS: Windows 2000 → All
> >------- Additional Comment #11 From Asa Dotzler 2002-01-25 20:36 ------- > >not a leak, just a high memory usage. Over to Layout folks. Not a leak ? I don't see the memory beeing reclaimed if I continue browsing random other sites after I did a bugzilla query and mozilla 'ate' 200 Mbyte.
For reference bugzilla query resulted in: about 3000 bugs found about 200 Mbyte memory used about 250 Kbyte worth of text in the bugzilla result
Is there any work being done on this? Has this finally been acknowledged as confirmed and is reproducible? Here's my experience for build 2002042706 RC1.0.0: When running the following bugzilla query: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&field0-0-0=short_desc&type0-0-0=substring&value0-0-0=/&field0-0-1=status_whiteboard&type0-0-1=substring&value0-0-1=/ mozilla chews up nearly all virtual memory and most of the CPU (from MS WINTOP - it's all I got). This even after it appears the query is finished and the message comes back with the "This list is too long for bugzilla's little mind; the Next/Prev/First/Last buttons won't appear." message. Eventually the system settles down (CPU usage near idle and VM stabilizes), I do a reload of the query and mozilla crashes (talkback incidents: TB5763283Y and TB5763039M), most likely from lack of free memory. I know enough about CGI to say that except for displaying the result, all the processing happens on the server not the client, therefore the >2700 results displayed should take up no more resources on the client machine than displaying a multi-page html doc. Something very bad is happening with Mozilla in this case and it's possible it's not restricted to just for queries on the bugzilla.mozilla.org site. We resource constrained users (Windows 95b, 133 Pentium, 64 MB RAM, 600 MB HD) are the ones that always notice these bugs and of course complain the loudest ;-)
I am unable to reproduce this loading a buglist in a local file. I stuck it on my localhost http server, and still couldn't reproduce it. I tried disabling my memory/disk cache and tried pulling the buglist from bugzilla, and it still happened. Why is this in Search?
linux build 20020504 under gdb, I caught Mozilla while the memory usage was spiking and caught it with a stack that looked like: #0 0x40602044 in memcpy () at memcpy:-1 #1 0x4a54b008 in ?? () <-- should be LiteralImpl::Create, I think #2 0x40ef094a in RDFServiceImpl::GetLiteral (this=0x810bde8, aValue=0x45dd4b1a, aLiteral=0xbffebea0) at nsRDFService.cpp:1215 I put a printf statement in LiteralImpl::Create to see what it was doing. It was allocating memory in approximately 1.4MB chunks. 100 times. It also allocated a bunch of smaller arrays. When it was all done, it was using ~170MB. I'll attach the output. updating URL to the one I used. It returns 1800 bugs. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?chfield=%5BBug+creation%5D&chfieldfrom=03%2F01%2F2002&chfieldto=03%2F12%2F2002 ==> RDF
This is a known problem with search.
Assignee: waterson → sgehani
Component: RDF → Search
QA Contact: tever → claudius
Whiteboard: [awd:tbl] → DUPEME
search is grabbing the memory for the "HTML response chunk" (InternetSearchDataSource::ParseHTML). It looks like it's trying to make a copy of each individual search hit, but includes a copy of the whole page below as well. resultItemStart and resultItemEnd seem reasonable, and resultItem is ok. Then it does: const PRUnichar *htmlResponseUni = resultItem.get(); the result is not null-terminated (at resultItemEnd), so when RDF checks strlen, it gets the whole page. Right? The 100 I mentioned in comment 29 is the max number of hits that get saved.
this should make it into 1.0.1 if not 1.0. looks like a regression from bug 77460. see comment 77 can I get an review here?
Target Milestone: mozilla1.2alpha → mozilla1.0.1
rjc would be the right person to review this (maybe samir if he has taken over all that from rjc.
Comment on attachment 82752 [details] [diff] [review] copy resultItem instead of point at it (Shame about having to byte-copy the string. <sigh> Oh well.) Move the free(htmlResponseUni) up inside of the if (htmlResponseUni) and then r=rjc
Attachment #82752 - Flags: review+
Comment on attachment 84881 [details] [diff] [review] patch v2 r=rjc
Attachment #84881 - Flags: review+
Created attachment 85910 [details] Sites unrelated to Bugzilla also cause memory usage to skyrocket There are a few sites unrelated to Bugzilla that cause Mozilla memory usage to skyrocket. For example, rendering the Time Warner Road Runner site http://dialaccess.rr.com/servlet/dr/AccessNumber causes memory usage to increase from 21.9 meg to 92.2 meg. (Please see attachment.) Can someone confirm whether this high memory usage is related to this bug? Thanks very much. BTW, I'm using Moz build 2002060104 on Win 2K with 512 meg of RAM.
Dom: the internet search component is not activated on the rr page, so it's not this bug. Please file a new bug.
isn't this bug 49539 ?
bug 49539 started out different than this bug, but morphed into this one after bug 49539 comment 45.
*** Bug 147115 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 150581 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Andrew, have you requested a sr= for this 2-line patch? It has an r= and fixes a 100-megabyte memory hog/leak. Who is the super-reviewer covering this component? blaker? jag? alecf? brendan?
Samir (bug assignee) is the person to super-review this
Andrew: No, super-review can only be given by the people listed at <http://mozilla.org/hacking/reviewers.html>.
argh! looking for sr=? here. thanks.
1.0.1 has passed moving milestones.
Target Milestone: mozilla1.0.1 → mozilla1.0.2
Andrew, it might be wise to email some people on the http://mozilla.org/hacking/reviewers.html list asking for a super review
Comment on attachment 84881 [details] [diff] [review] patch v2 The problem here is that |resultItem| is being lied to by the CBufDescriptor it gets, causing the nsAutoString to not be properly zero terminated, thereby breaking its interface promise. This causes its use below to "fail". Since we now end up copying the substring anyway, why not just ditch the CBufDescriptor and copy into the nsAutoString itself?
Attachment #84881 - Flags: needs-work+
Copy into |resultItem|, that is.
Created attachment 100366 [details] [diff] [review] patch v3 patch to copy into |resultItem|
Attachment #84881 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment on attachment 100366 [details] [diff] [review] patch v3 sr=jag
Attachment #100366 - Flags: superreview+
Comment on attachment 100366 [details] [diff] [review] patch v3 r=rjc IFF you add a comment detailing why "CBufDescriptor" can't be used
Is this fix going to get checked in before the freeze for Mozilla 1.2 beta?
I just checked this patch in, so marking FIXED.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago → 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.