Memory leak in v0.52 while unpacking on DS-209-II?

[mrombout]

Hi all,

Version: 0.5.2 Final
OS: Synology Linux version 2.6.24, firmware DSM 2.3-1157
Install-type: NAS package, afterwards upgrade to v5.2 using SABhelper
Skin lush
Firewall Software: none
Are you using IPV6? : no
Is the issue reproducible? Probably when I fill up my queue with ±50GB of files

The main issue is that files are not being unrar´d when download has finished.
Memory is occupied for 81% at that time.
When I restart the SABNZBD service from the webinterface, memory usage drops to a comfortable 17% and operation continues as normal.

I also took some screenshots to clarify the issue and attached them to the post. In case you cant see them here´s a referral post on a Dutch Synology forum http://www.synology-forum.nl/viewtopic. ... 241#p18241
Any help or suggestions are very welcome  :)

[shypike]

SABnzbd is quite memory hungry and Python is reluctant to
give memory back to the OS.
How much memory do you have installed?

[mrombout]

SABnzbd is quite memory hungry and Python is reluctant to
give memory back to the OS.
How much memory do you have installed?

The NAS has 512 MB (default) of memory on board.
Can a tweak be applied to let Phyton release memory more frequently?

[shypike]

Not to my knowledge.
Do you have a large memory cache setting in Config->General?
A 50G queue is not very big.
Can you check the SABnzbd_nzo_* files in the cache folder?
Most should be below 50K, if not than there's another problem.

[mrombout]

Not to my knowledge.
Do you have a large memory cache setting in Config->General?
A 50G queue is not very big.
Can you check the SABnzbd_nzo_* files in the cache folder?
Most should be below 50K, if not than there's another problem.

I assume you mean Article Cache Limit. This field has no value.
In the help file I see a tip; 0=Disable Cache -1= Unlimited cache number.
I´ve entered a 0 to disable the cache.
I will check the content and size of the SABnzbd_nzo_* files in the cache folder when I get home.

Update:
SABnzbd_nzo_IAxeiK, 14.970.880 bytes
SABnzbd_nzo_IdcDnZ, 0 bytes
SABnzbd_nzo_WKosYV, 209.299 bytes

So the first one is almost 15 MB? 

[shypike]

The first one is likely the active job.
It is rather big. How much needs to be downloaded?
If it's about 20G or bigger, than the size matches.

We haven't really looked at memory consumption and (temporary)
memory leaks. We will in the future, but the to-do list is large.
Also, on the average PC/Mac, it's seldom an issue.

[mrombout]

The first one is likely the active job.
It is rather big. How much needs to be downloaded?
If it's about 20G or bigger, than the size matches.

We haven't really looked at memory consumption and (temporary)
memory leaks. We will in the future, but the to-do list is large.
Also, on the average PC/Mac, it's seldom an issue.

The queue was empty at that point...

[shypike]

OK, so that was debris left behind (an issue that will be solved in 0.6.0).
At this moment there's not much more I can advise or do.

[mrombout]

OK, so that was debris left behind (an issue that will be solved in 0.6.0).
At this moment there's not much more I can advise or do.

Never mind Shypike, we´ll see what the disablement of the cache will do.
Looking forward to 0.6.0 though! 

Keep up the great work you are doing! Respect for such a versatile / wonderful product.