[chuck-users] implementing a "wait for signal with timeout"

[mike clemow]

Hans,

Actually, these machines explicitly complain about non-reclaimable
memory due a process named "chuck," which has eaten it all.  Then
either the OS will kill chuck, or I will have to manually kill the
system by rebooting the machine.  I went through my code, however, and
have been finding some objects that are unnecessarily created every
time a certain method (spawning a grain) is called, which will
definitely contribute to the memory leaks.  I'm fixing those as I find
them.

Wasn't there a trick to deallocating memory for objects?  I thought
you could do something like, ...

null => myObject;

... however, this crashes chuck on my machines.

_mc

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Hans Aberg<haberg at math.su.se> wrote:
> On 9 Jun 2009, at 21:38, mike clemow wrote:
>
>> Haha, I'm eating my words:  my little cluster machines are all frozen
>> now because ChucK ate all the memory!
>
> It may be due CPU overload, rather than memory exhaustion that might cause
> segmentation fault instead. This happened when I ran Robert's example, but
> the machine came back after a while.
>
>  Hans
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
>



-- 
http://michaelclemow.com
http://semiotech.org