-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 150
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
Still experiencing memory leak with version [email protected] #576
Comments
We are also experiencing it with |
Also seeing it -- In my case a 16x increase in memory. 2.5.3 works for us. |
I am also seeing the same issue.. Kindly fix it. |
BTW, Thanks to @peterikladious suggestion. |
@bimalkjha Any update on this issue? I am struck with 2.5.3 |
@balajic Please install latest code from github using command |
@bimalkjha First I tried version 2.5.3 and it worked fine.
Then I tried the Current Production Version 2.6.1 - worked fine
Finally the latest version from git and failed. No firewall issues with accessing the site.
Some more logs
Tail of the log
|
@bimaljha Hold on. This server doesn't have git. Let me try after installing it |
@bimalkjha Installation went through fine after installing git.. However it didn't address the Memory Leak.
BTW, I am (ab)using ibm_db to replace DataStage and implemented true massive child process to extract the data in parallel. I am just pushing the limit on the server, firing 50 parralel queries at the same time and hence you see the Memory/CPU shoots up in a sec on this 16 Core 62 GB Memory server. However when I use [email protected] memory consumption hardly goes up, may be 100 - 200 MB maximum 1GB. |
@bimalkjha After running a bunch of 2.5.3 vs master tests, I also confirmed that master's memory usage is not as good as 2.5.3's. In terms of memoryUsage.heapTotal, memoryUsage.heapUsed, and memoryUsage.external, master is very close to 2.5.3. That's why the current tests for memory leak do not flag any issue. In terms of memoryUsage.rss, both 2.5.3 and master grow. However, 2.5.3's growth rate is so slow, when compared to master's, it looks like 2.5.3 levels off and master keeps growing. Attached is a zip file with
|
This is something our project is experiencing as well. Memory usage has been fine on 2.5.0, we recently upgraded to 2.6.1 and noticed bad behavior. |
We have experienced this also with 2.6.1. Going back to 2.5.1 fixed our memory leak. |
Also having problems with memory on |
* doc: update for issue #593 (Bimal Jha) * fix: update windows binary using latest code (Bimal Jha) * fix: for memory leak issue #576 (Bimal Jha) * fix: update windows binary for vscode 1.40.x (Bimal Jha) * update windows binaries (Bimal Jha) * fix: add executeNonQuerySync in odbc.js issue #595 (Bimal Jha) * fix: ignore sqlcode 100 by executeNonQuery, issue #591 (Bimal Jha) * fix: use v8::Isolate for nodev >= 11 (Bimal Jha) * fix: update unzipper version, issue #588 (Bimal Jha) * Support for node v12 on z/OS, and fix some test cases for z/OS (#586) (alexcfyung) * force push connection to the queue when poolSize breaches maxPool boundry (#581) (ashutoshrnjn) * doc: update doc for executeNonQuerySync API, issue #583 (Bimal Jha) * fix: blob data corruption issue #582 (Bimal Jha) * support for install --debug option on windows (Priyanka Manoharan) * doc: Docker Linux Container instructions (Bimal Jha)
@weemsdj @RabeaWahab @peterikladious @balajic @wnwaynelee @dexdexdex @alanramsay @hiro5id We have delivered fix of memory leak issue and restored the behavior at 2.5.3 level. |
The [email protected] update seems to resolve the memory leak issues for us. But it also seems to make the overall performance of our service worse by 50-100% (the service takes ~50-100% longer time to complete) in comparison to the version running on [email protected]. The only difference for our Node.js application between these tests is the update to [email protected] (from [email protected]) and update from Node 10 to Node12. Is there any reason for this drop in performance? |
@wahlbergfredrik Thanks for confirming that memory leak issue is fixed. For performance issues, we have another issue #269 in open state. We can use that open issue for performance thing. Also, I have doubt about the performance degradation claim. If you see the last two comments of issue 269, node.js v12.x and [email protected] has far better performance compared to [email protected]. That issue has a test program too and I too have added perTest.js to check the performance. If you test schenario is different, please share a similar test program like Thanks. |
@bimaljha memory leak is not reproducible anymore, thank you. |
We have also seen the memory leak in our production environment with [email protected] and recently updated to 2.6.1. It seems memory leak is still an issue and we had to revert back to using 2.5.3 to stabilize our code.
Not certain how soon this can be addressed, but we are staying with version 2.5.3
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: