-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
In procedure pipe: Too many open files #52
Comments
The above print is garbled, but then, running the code a second time gives a cleaner print:
At the repl, I see:
Manually running |
This may be related to issue #36 except that, for me, running (gc) a bunch of times does not fix the leak. My version of guile is the one that comes as default with ubuntu focal 20.04:
Issue #36 says:
I have no idea whether this is fixed in 3.0.1 or not. |
My problem is not fixed by the patch provided in issue #36 although it does give me a clean stack trace, unlike the garbled ones above:
|
@linas anyway you can try 3.0.2? |
I'll try. My datasets are in a production environment, I'll have to futz around a bit to port everything to a test environment. My understanding of the comments in #36 is that the patch there should fix things, even for 3.01, and it doesn't. (It should have worked, because the close is explicit; whereas the close-via-gc needs something newer than 3.0.2) |
Some stuff worth noting:
I don't know if your usage patterns look anything like this, but it is in theory still possible to exhaust file descriptors by repeatedly calling Hope that helps. |
After monkeying with fibers for 5-10 minutes, I get the error:
I've gotten this several times now, each time after a clean restart. This is using
git clone
of today's git.I do not have any simple test case to reproduce this: my fibers code is very simple, but it's working within a large & complex framework of other code. (specifically, inside of https://github.com/opencog/learn/) (you won't find fibers code in there, because I'm still experimenting with it.)
(I'm trying to see if I can use fibers to parallelize a work-farm (a local async proceedure call): I've got a subroutine that is slow but is called many times. I cannot use
par-for-each
, because that subroutine is called from several different places under quite different circumstances. So fibers seemed ideal for this. Of course I could just create a thread-pool, too.)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: