[PyKDE] RE: Slow memory leak when paintCell is overridden in QListViewItem

[Phil Thompson]

This will be fixed in tonight's SIP4 snapshot.

Phil

> I re-tested against sip-snapshot-20041121 (also rebuilt PyQt 3.13) and I
> still observe the slow memory leak. With the paintCell override VM size
> increased from 3000k to around 11000k in about 5 minutes. This is about
> the same rate that I had observed with SIP 4.1 and PyQt 3.13, so nothing
> seems to have changed between the two SIP versions.
>
> I also tried the latest SIP snapshot by not overriding paintCell and I did
> observe a very small memory increase initially but I am not sure if I can
> call it a leak. It increased from 2980k to 3032k after 5 minutes of
> running and kept that value afterwards (I ran it for about half an hour).
>
> -Selim
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Phil Thompson [mailto:phil at riverbankcomputing.co.uk]
>> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 5:12 AM
>> To: Tuvi, Selim
>> Cc: pykde at mats.imk.fraunhofer.de
>> Subject: Re: Slow memory leak when paintCell is overridden in
>> QListViewItem
>>
>> On Saturday 20 November 2004 2:40 am, Tuvi, Selim wrote:
>> > Hi, we have a module which displays some statistics in a QListView. We
>> > wanted to change how the list view looked like so we subclassed the
>> > QListViewItem and implemented our own paintCell method.
>> >
>> > When we override the paintCell method, we observe a slow memory leak.
>> If
>> we
>> > do not override the paintCell method then the memory leak does not
>> occur.
>> >
>> > I am attaching a standalone version of the module that you can test.
>> >
>> > We are running under Windows XP, PyQt 3.13, SIP 4.1, Qt 3.3.3 and
>> Python
>> > 2.3.4 all compiled with Visual Studio .NET 2003.
>> >
>> > The memory leak can be observed under the task manager, Processes tab,
>> > under the VM Size column.
>> >
>> > I haven't verified yet if this is a problem with Qt or PyQt or maybe
>> it
>> is
>> > my code.
>>
>> With SIP v4.0.1 I saw a very slow leak with your "working" code and a
>> not
>> so
>> very slow leak with your "broken" code.
>>
>> With the current SIP snapshot I saw a very slow leak with both versions.
>> Subjectively I think the leak was slower than with v4.0.1.
>>
>> I'll continue looking, but if you can try the snapshot I'd be interested
>> to
>> know if you think it improved.
>>
>> Phil
>
>