notify-osd heavy memory usage

[Son]

Binary package hint: notify-osd

currently it uses 29MB, as much as X server (30 MB) and far more than compiz (18MB). Comparing the functionalities provided, this is not normal.

[Mirco Müller (macslow)]

What means did you use to determine this value of 29 MBytes of memory used by notify-osd? Can you please also state you setup in terms of gfx-card, used gfx-driver, window-manager used. Thanks in advance!

[Mat Tomaszewski (mat.t.)]

29 MB of RAM does not seem like heavy usage.

[Mat Tomaszewski (mat.t.)]

On my system notify-osd uses around 17MB.

[Cody Russell (bratsche)]

I'm seeing 16516 kB heap, 108 kB stack memory used. Everything else seems to be shared libraries and such.

[Son (son.caokim)]

After recent update, I've as well around 17MB. Nevertherless, I consider
that 17MB is still too much :-)

...... Original Message .......
On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:18:56 -0000 "Cody Russell" <email address hidden>
wrote:
>I'm seeing 16516 kB heap, 108 kB stack memory used. Everything else
>seems to be shared libraries and such.
>
>--
>notify-osd heavy memory usage
>https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/334141
>You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
>of the bug.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

the writtable memory in gnome-system-monitor is around 16megas on my jaunty

[Son (son.caokim)]

For the 29MB, it was via the gtop (the thing that gets poped up if you click on the panel's performance monitor).

For the other details you asked, can you provide further instructions?

 ..... Original Message .......
On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:28:55 -0000 "Mirco Müller" <email address hidden> wrote:
>What means did you use to determine this value of 29 MBytes of memory
>used by notify-osd? Can you please also state you setup in terms of gfx-
>card, used gfx-driver, window-manager used. Thanks in advance!
>
>** Changed in: notify-osd (Ubuntu)
> Assignee: (unassigned) => Mirco Müller (macslow)
> Status: New => Incomplete
>
>--
>notify-osd heavy memory usage
>https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/334141
>You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
>of the bug.

[Cody Russell (bratsche)]

You can't really use top output as a remotely reliable source of memory information. Even to get the numbers I posted above, I was pulling those out of /proc/$PID/status and I don't think that's really a completely accurate source of memory information. To get realistic numbers you probably need to use something like valgrind.

If you don't know what type of video card/driver you're using, you might be able to give Mirco an estimate with the GLX renderer string. Try running:
   glxinfo | grep renderer

For example, on my Intel X3100 it says:
   OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) 965GM GEM 20090114 x86/MMX/SSE2

Maybe there's a way to get a more accurate description of your video hardware, I don't know.

[Son (son.caokim)]

Here comes glxinfo | grep renderer
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) 945GME GEM 20090114 x86/MMX/SSE2

Here comes the /proc/$PID/status. What is the significant value that one
needs to retain for the discussion?

cat /proc/3851/status
Name: notify-osd
State: S (sleeping)
Tgid: 3851
Pid: 3851
PPid: 1
TracerPid: 0
Uid: 1000 1000 1000 1000
Gid: 100 100 100 100
FDSize: 256
Groups: 4 20 21 24 26 29 30 44 46 100 104 106 108 114 123 124 126
VmPeak: 35376 kB
VmSize: 35368 kB
VmLck: 0 kB
VmHWM: 24316 kB
VmRSS: 23788 kB
VmData: 16000 kB
VmStk: 108 kB
VmExe: 120 kB
VmLib: 15816 kB
VmPTE: 52 kB
Threads: 1
SigQ: 2/16382
SigPnd: 0000000000000000
ShdPnd: 0000000000000000
SigBlk: 0000000000000000
SigIgn: 0000000020001000
SigCgt: 0000000180000000
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: 0000000000000000
CapEff: 0000000000000000
CapBnd: ffffffffffffffff
Cpus_allowed: 00000000,00000003
Cpus_allowed_list: 0-1
Mems_allowed: 1
Mems_allowed_list: 0
voluntary_ctxt_switches: 14643
nonvoluntary_ctxt_switches: 329

---------

Cody: for the memory foot print, my point is that the notify-osd should not
range in the top consumers. As stated before, after recent update, the top
reported a reduction from 29MB to 17MB, but it's still in the top list.
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 16:03, Cody Russell <email address hidden> wrote:

> You can't really use top output as a remotely reliable source of memory
> information. Even to get the numbers I posted above, I was pulling
> those out of /proc/$PID/status and I don't think that's really a
> completely accurate source of memory information. To get realistic
> numbers you probably need to use something like valgrind.
>
> If you don't know what type of video card/driver you're using, you might be
> able to give Mirco an estimate with the GLX renderer string. Try running:
> glxinfo | grep renderer
>
> For example, on my Intel X3100 it says:
> OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) 965GM GEM 20090114 x86/MMX/SSE2
>
> Maybe there's a way to get a more accurate description of your video
> hardware, I don't know.
>
> --
> notify-osd heavy memory usage
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/334141
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

[David Barth (dbarth)]

Mirco, can you take a look and tell us if this is normal? It seems that 17MB is a lot. Especially, if you're still working on a cache for the blur effect for example.

[Pedro Villavicencio (pedro)]

questions were answered, setting the Ubuntu task to Triaged to reflect the status of the upstream one, thanks.

[Cody Russell (bratsche)]

So I'm working on moving my pixbuf scaling code into notify-osd, and I noticed in bubble.c bubble_set_icon_from_pixbuf() doesn't appear to unref pixbufs under all conditions, and it seems very likely that we're leaking pixbufs here.

I'm not sure how useful it is to apply this patch since I'm planning to change this code to preserve the aspect ratio when scaling pixbufs. But here it is anyway.

[Son (son.caokim)]

Gentlements,

I've noticed that the notify-osd memory usage is reduced to 4.8 mbs
recently on my box (regularly updated).

I'd guess that recent changes partially, if not fully, contribute to
this reduction. So thank you for the continuous progress.

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 19:36, Cody Russell <email address hidden> wrote:
> So I'm working on moving my pixbuf scaling code into notify-osd, and I
> noticed in bubble.c bubble_set_icon_from_pixbuf() doesn't appear to
> unref pixbufs under all conditions, and it seems very likely that we're
> leaking pixbufs here.
>
> I'm not sure how useful it is to apply this patch since I'm planning to
> change this code to preserve the aspect ratio when scaling pixbufs.  But
> here it is anyway.
>
> ** Attachment added: "leaky-pixbufs.diff"
>   http://launchpadlibrarian.net/24536051/leaky-pixbufs.diff
>
> --
> notify-osd heavy memory usage
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/334141
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>

[Ubeer (berendbotjeginguitvaren)]

Well, I just had usage of over 300 MB...
The only things that have been displayed have been "Now playing" stuff from banshee (1.5.0) and notifications of my laptop connecting over wireless ad-hoc.

If you need more information, please let me know!

[Mirco Müller (macslow)]

Via which means did you aquire this number?

[Mirco Müller (macslow)]

BTW, on my system notify-osd is reported to be using 8.3 MBytes by gnome-system-monitor. top reports for notify-osd 17 MBytes (RES) and 174 MBytes (VIRT).

[David Barth (dbarth)]

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. You reported this bug a while ago and there hasn't been any activity in it recently. We were wondering if this is still an issue for you. Can you try with the latest Ubuntu release? Thanks in advance.

[Son (son.caokim)]

Personally, I don't have the pb anymore (on uptodate Jaunty).

...... Original Message .......
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:09:18 -0000 "David Barth"
<email address hidden> wrote:
>Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make
>Ubuntu better. You reported this bug a while ago and there hasn't been
>any activity in it recently. We were wondering if this is still an issue
>for you. Can you try with the latest Ubuntu release? Thanks in advance.
>
>--
>notify-osd heavy memory usage
>https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/334141
>You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
>of the bug.

[Jonathan Prior (behe)]

On my system, notify-osd is using 700MB of RAM and 1.5GB of swap. All it's been doing all day is putting up Banshee notifications of new tracks. I had to kill the process.

[Mirco Müller (macslow)]

Jonathan, with which version of notify-osd you saw that (in a terminal do: dpkg --list notify-osd)? What tool did you use to aquire the memory-usage of notify-osd? Thanks in advance!

[hackel (hackel)]

I was running Banshee as well, and now top shows notify-osd using 822M VIRT, 757M RES. System Monitor shows it using 142.2M with a heap size of 643.8M. This strikes me as a pretty serious bug and I hope it gets resolved by the next release. FYI--still running 0.9.11-0ubuntu3 under Jaunty. Is this the same issue that was fixed in bug #378193? This issue is serious enough that the fix should be back-ported I think...

[Michael Martin-Smucker (mmartinsmucker)]

I had noticed abnormally high memory usage with notify-osd + banshee as well while using Jaunty. I recently install Karmic, and now memory usage is at a reasonable 11mb according to System Monitor.

[Mirco Müller (macslow)]

Michael, so you're running notify-osd 0.9.22?

[David Barth (dbarth)]

Should be fixed with the new 0.9.22 release now (plugged memleaks + autorestart)

[David Barth (dbarth)]

Fixed with the new 0.9.22 release now (plugged memleaks + autorestart)

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

I ran notify-osd from lp:notify-osd (rev397), sent a bunch of bubbles with random stock icons under valgrind and didn't see anything obviously leaking here anymore.

that said, I am not sure that auto restart is something we should do ... a) it hides memleaks and b) it breaks apps that are not properly dealing with notify-osd being temporarily down (NameOwnerChanged) - like gwibber in the past.

[RJ Skerry-Ryan (rryan)]

I just clean installed 10.04 desktop and after 3-4 hours of playing tracks with Banshee, notify-osd is consuming 541M RES and 1230M VIRT. I'm guessing this means that not all of the leaks are gone.

[Vlad Pescaru (vladp)]

I have the problem too. Right now, after just 2 hours since I started my computer notify-osd already uses 442MiB on ubuntu 10.04

[Fabien Meghazi (OpenERP) (fme)]

1109 Mo VIRT and 672 RES on my computer (I never turn it off, always use suspend)

 notify-osd is a memory hog