Re: [Mlt-devel] SWIG bindings for mlt_x_close (playlist/consumer) not included

[Dan D. <da...@de...>]

This has worked in the past. I need to know more about your
application before I offer to debug these things for you. Is it an
open source project?

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Aaron Cruz <aa...@aa...> wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> What you suggested (setting to nil) has never worked for me in the past.
>
> I just created a little test to showcase this here
> https://gist.github.com/pferdefleisch/1e448e3257837ebeb2b3
> My memory is never released. It stayed in my test with 100 short .movs right
> around 200MB with 0.0% CPU.
> I also tried something that I found on the SWIG page with the mlt.i file
> (you can see in the gist).
>
> Since there seems to be no garbage collected playlist factory, I tried the
> same test above but with just connecting the consumer to a non-playlist
> producer with the same results, no memory released.
>
> I have also seen strange things happen like when I set 'autoclose' to 1, as
> mlt plays my list, clips are removed, but memory is only released, and only
> a tiny bit, when I append new videos. Maybe this is a separate bug.
> --
> thanks for your time,
> aaron
>
> On May 5, 2013, at 8:24 PM, Dan Dennedy wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Aaron Cruz <aa...@aa...> wrote:
>
> I am trying to create a reset functionality in my Ruby code that will clean
> up my consumer and playlist (Mlt::Factory.consumer and Mlt::Playlist
> respectively).
>
> It seems like both the mlt_playlist_close and mlt_consumer_close functions
> were made for this but they are not included in the SWIG bindings.
>
> Is there a reason they were left out?
>
> Is there a better way to to this with the already provided interface?
>
>
> I would like my server to handle the reset instead of having to reset my
> server. I am also still having memory leak issues and I would like to tweak
> some things like this for some experiments.
>
> --
>
> Thank you,
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
> The C++ destructors call the C close functions. When you release
> references in a scripting language and garbage collection occurs, then
> the C++ destructors are called. If you want to make cleanup more
> immediate in the scripting language runtime, then set the vars holding
> reference to nil and force processing the garbage collection. If you
> call the C close functions directly, then the C++ destructors will
> (eventually) call close on invalid pointers.
>
> --
> +-DRD-+
>
>



-- 
+-DRD-+