Hi,

When I load KM it uses somewhere around 20MB of physical memory, but if I leave it open all day, that grows to - in the example below - 90MB and climbing. It also starts to feel sluggish.

http://bayimg.com/CaLdlaABE

At the point above it only had two tabs open, but I'd been using it previously with more than that.

Is this a known problem, or something only I am seeing?

Cheers,

Matt

The OS allocated the RAM to the idle program?
Are You sure that it is not the sloppy programed OS?

1.5 is freshly programed and as far as I understand the docs, it has no known leaks. Dorian's docs only mention (fixing) leaks for older versions exes & kplugins.

This does not exclude that the GRE may still have leaks. (I did not check with recent SeaMonkey docs -so I do not have info whether GRE has leaks).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/03/2008 06:25PM by guenter.

I see this memory growth, too. It has gotten so bad I've gone back to 1.1.4 or so. I've had the program size over 760Mb at times -- Right now it's 105Mb according to the task manager, and 238Mb virtual size according to Process Explorer!

The good thing is by minimizing it goes back to a reasonable size and it takes a while before it gets too big again.

I doubt that any found a memory leak in 1.5 - as You say:
You observe a growth of used RAM! Solution: You clear it by minimising

AFAIK You can not retreave leaked memeory by just minimising the application because leaked memory is permamently lost.

There is a sensible feature/setting the makes the GRE book as much memory as possible. & it is the WindOS that allows applications to book memeory that would be idle otherwise.

But You You could possibly argue at Microsoft's OS Forum (if they have any )that You do not like that and You want the vendor to implement a setting to stops applications to do what You personaly consider a waste.

p.s. The observation is old. Keyword for search: "RAM & minimizing"& "clearing memory by minimizing" for Gecko based browsers. In the past some GRE & k-m versions had leaks - but I no info of recent ones.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2008 08:44PM by guenter.

I can confirm the uncontrolled grow in memory usage for version 1.5 and 1.5.1. Never had this with previous versions. (I'm thinking to revert to 1.1.4 or 1.1.3)

Günter, what do you mean by old? Can you be more explicit about what you mean the solution is?

Eugen

Quote
Eugen Mezei
I can confirm the uncontrolled grow in memory usage for version 1.5 and 1.5.1. Never had this with previous versions. (I'm thinking to revert to 1.1.4 or 1.1.3)

Günter, what do you mean by old? Can you be more explicit about what you mean the solution is?

Eugen

I confirm the uncontrolled grow in memory usage too. It's nearly similar to Firefox.

Nobody doubts that You all oberved the feature which is not uncontrolled.
It is controlled & it is the OS's job to controll it. :O


But that does not mean that K-Meleon 1.5.x is leaking memory.:cool:

"Memory leak" has a specific meaning. :O

You minimize Gecko browsers to realease the memory. & if minimizing gives You back memory - it is not leaked but the OS has allocated the memory to an application that requested it. You do not get leaked memory back so easy.

Quote
Eugen Mezei

Günter, what do you mean by old

Eugen, old = something I read here when 0.82 was young. At that time - I came to this forum and chose the nick guenter (an almost real name instead of my internet aka sterntaler) to get help.

Quote
Eugen Mezei

Can you be more explicit about what you mean the solution is?

Sorry Eugen, but I do not recall whether You can turn the pref/feature off via about:config.

If You could I would not do it. It is part of the "Caching". It makes sence that Gecko browsers request & get idle memory.

& 1.5.x is more responsive in many aspects. It would sure make sence if it gets requested memory faster.:drool:



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2008 02:09PM by guenter.

after many tests, i have to confirm that 1.5.1 does indeed suffer from a leak..

here's my proof:

You convinced me. But the , does not get any



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2008 10:16PM by guenter.

yes but ie is having enough problems on its own

I understand it as an old problem of gecko. I used this program, CleanMem By PCWinTech.com. You can set to run every 5 -10-20 -30 min via the windows scheduled task-system tools-accessories. The program doesn't run in the back ground, once it does its job it closes and doesn't run again until the task scheduler runs it. This way K-mels memory don't bloat. You can always check what the program does in the windows task manager.................................... Hope it helped

http://www.majorgeeks.com/Cleanmem_d5972.html

i seriously don't see the problem.. the only thing i can concur with that 1.5.x does consume a little bit more memory than 1.1.x.

i don't have any memory managers or anything handling kmeleon's memory.. we all know windows os is not the best handler of memory but it's not that terrible, it could all be to how you let windows handle memory and how is your swap file configured.

the only differences i have from the 'normal' windows install is; i always unload unused dlls(can be set in registry) and i don't have an antivirus installed or any resident crap running in the background.. so i suggest to check your systems first before blaming kmeleon of memory problems

k-meleon maximised: (running for about an hour-visited like 10 sites during with an average of 6 tabs open)


k-meleon minimised:


taskmanager
maximised:


minimised:

@ Disrupted

"here's my proof:"

Looks pretty "con" vincing.:cool:

Charlie

~~If it ain't broke, why screw it up?~~

@disrupted: A _little_ bit of memory is a good joke. I got around 200 MB after 10-15 minutes of use grabbed by K-Meleon. After I applied the Gecko "patch" now it goes up more slowly but als it goes up to 150-200 MB. Minimizing brings nothing. More than that, shuttig the program also brings nothing; K-Meleon dissapears but it does not free memory and you can see it as a process in Task Manager. Only after killing the process is memory given free again.

What _I_ don't understand is this not invented here atitude. Yes, 1.5.x has some nice features I expected from earlier version, but it also has this bug and negating it or proposing stupid solution (come on, proposing not running a virus scanner is really idiotic) will not helyp anybody. The only thing that will occur is that people will use other browsers, working ones.

Eugen

i wasn't proposing dropping the antiviruses.. i was explaining how my system differs from a regular windows platform. what i'm trying to say is; some resident programs(and not necessarily an antivirus) will use up too much resources or handle your resources badly leaving k-meleon or any other program for that matter struggling for their share of memory which will naturally cause them to run inadequately.

furthermore, i don't think it was proper of you to say that running without an antivirus or even suggesting it as idiotic. i've never had an antivirus on my windows machines and i have NEVER had a virus on them. it's not 'idiotic' if you know what you are doing... i'm not the only one in the world like that, i don't think i'm an idiot or the others who are like me.. or that IT engineer at a texas bank:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/technology/6431853.stm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2008 06:42AM by disrupted.

You can do on your system what you believe is correct. But proposing your model as a solution insinuates going the way of disabling the resident part of an antivirus as resolving the problem.
Any other programs struggling.... no, no, it is only K-Meleon 1.5x that struggles for all the memory it can have. Any other program runs with normal memory consumption.
More than that, K-Meleon 1.1.x ran without the memory problem on exactly this same configuration. So don't tell me about everything being fine with KM 1.5x.

About whitelists... well, maybe I should go the same policy. At least it will beware me of installing crappy software like KM 1.5.
Come on.. how many people use whitelists or can configure them. Besides the article gives reference to the company that installed the software to the bank. You are free to ask them what it would cost to license their soft. And then the bank for a big loan.

Back to the problem:
I'm running XP SP2. Maybe SP3 will be the solution? Anyone can tell?

Eugen

again.. i wasn't proposing removing your antivirus or setting my system as a model, i have no idea where you got that idea.. i was stating the differences and here's why:

memory leaks are not conditional, meaning that a program which suffers from such a problem will always display bad handling and over-usage of memory over an extended period of time; regardless of what your system is like. if you have lot of ram, if you have little ram.. if you have a lot of programs running in the background or not, if you're using windows 9x or nt-based; a program with a memory leak will always display the same signs in all those circumstances.. maybe it will suffer less on a system with abundant ram but in the end it will slowly bloat into your memory no matter the environment/system or amount of ram.

take for example firefox 1.5 which does suffer from an XUL memory leak.. on any type of os(windows, mac, linux).. after some time, it starts behaving badly and showing its ill-manners when it comes to memory.

i'll give you that k-meleon 1.5.1 acts irresponsibly on your machine and perhaps a few others, but because its memory handling is not consistent on other machines and others have not complained or noticed any kind of bad behaviour.. that simply means that whatever is causing it to be like that on your system has nothing to do with a memory leak.

1.5.x needs more ram than 1.1.x.. there's no doubt about that but claiming it has a memory leak just because it's memory handling on a few machines is not as expected.. that's rubbish.

i'm not a staunch defender of k-meleon as your post seems to insinuate, G-d knows how i vigorously test every new release and i never hesitate to report bugs because naturally since it's my default browser i want it to be completely bug-free.. and if i noticed any indication of a memory-leak; i'll be making quite a scene in this forum!

Oh come on, different users reproduced the same issue and you tell us that if it doesn't appear on your system than it doesn't exist. Even MS handles bugs better than that. (In fact the times when they handled bugs by ignoring them are a long time ago gone.)

Eugen

Quote
Eugen Mezei
Oh come on, different users reproduced the same issue and you tell us that if it doesn't appear on your system than it doesn't exist. Even MS handles bugs better than that. (In fact the times when they handled bugs by ignoring them are a long time ago gone.)

Eugen

I repeat: what You observe is no leak(1) and no bug(2).

1.) You cannot free leaked memory by minimizing the browser.
Leaked memory is lost for the whole PC session. I remember the times when some Gecko engines had real leaks. They gave You blue screens on Win98/ME when You surfed enough. I still use ME - I would know if current versions had leaks!

2.) Collecting otherwise unused memory is a feature (all Geckos have that setting by default - it gives speed & is e.g. needed for fast backward moves ). All Your emphatic reports boil down to the fact that You do not want that setting. Why do only few complain? Because it causes only problems on the few systems where other programs try to do the same.

Dorian wrote about a similar "memory problem" with loader.exe.

Quote
Dorian

Minimizing doesn't free memory, it only move unused part to the swap. This will always happen when windows will need memory, so this is irrelevant.
Forum: K-Meleon Bugs

BTW. A bug can be reproduced on more or less all systems!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2008 08:14AM by guenter.

To 1: I wrote that I don't get back memory by minimizing the browser. In fact I wrote that I don't get back memory even by closing KM.
Bravo... you use ME, I use XP and using different environments you consider it oportune to exclude (some sentences later) problems on all the other systems than yours.

To 2: First of all, emphatic (and stupid) is your it was invented here so it must work position. Again, read what I wrote: I dissabled that feature and KM still behaves the same.
That a bug apperars only on a few systems is not an argument that this bug doesn't exist. (You argue the same as MS did 10 years ago.)

No, I have no loader.exe running.
Again, read: Versions prior to 1.5x had no problems. ON THE SAME SYSTEM!

That last one, about the bug is again big bullshit. As long as it can be reproduced in a controlled environment it is an evident bug, even if it does not come to life in other 10.000 different environments.

I hate this not invented here position of some people. This attitude beside being stupid is massively contraproductive. I am tired to describe a bug trying to contribute to solving problems just to get the answer that it can't exist what you don't want to exist. Have better things to do, really. I choose a tool that works and say goodbye to KM. I need working tools, not the masturbation of some ppl. horny about what a nice browser this one is. We had this same story with version 1.1.3

Eugen

i may get horny over the new mitsu evolution.. but i can't imagine getting horny over software :O

Quote
Eugen Mezei
To 1: I wrote that I don't get back memory by minimizing the browser. In fact I wrote that I don't get back memory even by closing KM.

Sorry did not get that You cannot retrieve memory that way.
No wonder that You got emphatic.

You want help against a bug. You need to get others into a position to reproduce it. Since You cannot - it is best You go. Experience tells me that software can break like any other machine and I do not want or need Your invective: no matter whether You OS or Your K-Meleon is damaged - or whether You are right with Your claim about a memory leak.

p.s. I use ME by default because it starts faster on my Pentium III 500 than XP on the same machine, Win2000 on my P 800, or WinXP or Vista on my Dual core Athlon 1700. To be precise: I never observed Your problem on any machine or OS here.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2008 06:32PM by guenter.

While it is obvious and understandable that the problem is really getting on your nerves after having to put up with it for some time now, blowing your top and being abusive to the folks who are graciously volunteering much time and effort to build KM and make available for free may only result in more harm than good. Causing people to reply in kind or not at all.

You mention that you are not using the Loader.exe. While it may not necessarily be the particular cause of the problem you are experiencing, I have personally found that not using the Loader.exe can result in KM 1.5.1 being much more resource intensive regarding both memory and cpu usage.

I hope you find the helpful.

Charlie

~~If it ain't broke, why screw it up?~~

What's wrong with this picture?

@ Posted by: Eugen Mezei
Date: October 22, 2008 11:28PM

"Never had this with previous versions. (I'm thinking to revert to 1.1.4 or 1.1.3)"

@ Posted by: Eugen Mezei
Date: November 06, 2008 11:43PM

More than that, K-Meleon 1.1.x ran without the memory problem on exactly this same configuration.

Then: Posted by: Eugen Mezei
Date: November 14, 2008 08:15PM

"This attitude beside being stupid is massively contraproductive."

yet

"We had this same story with version 1.1.3"



Charlie

~~If it ain't broke, why screw it up?~~

Charlie,

if you dear to remember: when 1.1.4 came out the people putting it online almost were lynched for doing so. Thing is 1.1.4 repaired some major bugs in 1.1.3. The scenario with 1.1.3 was exactly the same as with 1.5.x now, the same people denied the existence of bugs against a dozen users complaining about them.
That was what I refered.

Eugen

Pls. don't construct an exactly inverse situation of the given one. The actual situation (yes, I am grateful to the people who _really_ invest time in developing this software) here is me being the one investing time in signaling bugs and getting nothing more than deniance of the existence of these bugs. I am very sorry, but do you think I have nothing better to do than to invent some inexistent bug?

Eugen

Günter,

I described the bug in every detail, other people did the same and we see that the same malfunction is reproductible on different configurations. So what more do you need. I don't understand what would be a reproductible bug for you? One that besides not working on a lot other OS should also fail on your ME?

Eugen

Charly: What goes me on the nerves is less the nonfunctioning of the software itself. (I know now that it is not usable for productive work so I will not deploy it. This can always happen, not only with freeware.) What disturbs me most is that after investing (my) energy in describing a bug, energy on deniying it instead of repairing it.
It is the kind of situation of it can't exist what is not desired to exist.

Eugen

I will try to use loader.exe, although this seems ilogical to me. But let's see what happens.

Eugen

no one is denying the existence of bugs.. this would be very narrow minded, naturally every version may come with its own bugs or bugs transitioned from previous versions and weren't caught yet.

however a memory leak is a pretty serious matter and something that should not be taken lightly or accuse of lightly.. your whole post hovered around it and as i've explained, contrary to other bugs; memory leaks are consistent and they happen on all machines. so the problem on your and others machines; be it a bug or not; is not a memory leak. this is the reason this post has unfortunately degraded and became counter-productive instead of trying to help one another understand what is really going on.

personally i agree with you, that preloading the loader would not rectify the kind of problem that you are experiencing and even if it did, it won't be telling us much about the cause.

here's what i am suggesting and please don't shun that right away.. temporarily disable all resident programs, this will help pinpoint the problem/bug. restart your machine and fireup kmeleon.. browse normally for an hour or so, ofcourse you'll be running without your security programs so it'd be safest to stick to news sites(and perhaps better if you disable javascript during that session).. stay browsing for around the amount of time that you've noticed kmeleon would otherwise start expanding into your memory and report if it happens just the same anyway.

the reason i'm suggesting this is because i remember someone had all sorts of trouble with km(i think it was with the first releases of 1.5.0) and it turned out to be his antivirus.. i believe it was nod32.

several others have mentioned problems with firefall programs.. so a program can be affected by other programs running in the background.

also when i say disable residents, i don't just mean secuirty program but all applications that run in startup and stay running.. like for example calendar programs etc. you can open msconfig>startup and uncheck them all and when you're done with the test just check them back in. some antiviruses will not be affected by this new setting as they already foresee such an action and regard it as a malware induced so those have to disabled from their own configurations. some other programs run by adding shortcuts in the startup(all users/default user) folder.. just move those shortcuts to somewhere else.

it's a fact.. programs don't always like each other; especially 'security' programs.. they normally have a tough time getting along with others and it would be a long stretch to even say they might fall in love with other programs. this happens all the time.. whether its a firewall or an antivirus or a constant spyware scanner etc and trojan scanners in particular have a hard job.. they constantly keep monitoring your ports yet at the same time check those executables accessing those ports. sometimes there's a glitch and then it causes one of the 'good' programs to be ran over.

so try it and see if kmeleon behaves and hopefully this will help us undertsand what and who is causing this bug or conflict... good luck.