Rufus Baetz

_From [email protected] on August 11, 2008 21:29:10_ We should definitely run ShakesPeer through some instruments looking for leaks, and also try to reduce the memory usage a bit.

_From [email protected] on October 04, 2008 08:45:42_ Same problem here. I think it has something to do with the time you set the rehashing to ... It does have a...

_From [email protected] on October 04, 2008 09:31:53_ Yep, think so too. Couse it uses near 300Mb RSZIME right after program loading....

_From [email protected] on October 04, 2008 10:28:52_ Any volunteers to run Shakespeer through MallocDebug or some other method to find out more specifically what it is that grows in memory?

_From [email protected] on October 04, 2008 10:32:12_ If you give me instruction how to run throught MallocDebug on OS X I will do it.

_From [email protected] on October 04, 2008 10:41:49_ I can't start ShakesPeer throught MallocDebug, because it crash: Process: sphubd [10814] Path: /Applications/ShakesPeer.app/Contents/Resources/sphubd Identifier: sphubd Version: ??? (???) Code Type: X86 (Native)...

_From [email protected] on October 04, 2008 10:45:58_ I have tried to start ShakesPeer without sphubd (it work in background) and got another crash

_From [email protected] on February 03, 2009 18:12:04_ Just an observation of the memory behavior: Left SP running last nite and this morning it was chewing on 700+ MB but as...

_From [email protected] on March 28, 2009 01:53:59_ I ran it through leaks on my system, and found two (apparently different) problems. I'm attaching a patch that fixes one of them,...

_From [email protected] on March 28, 2009 13:28:28_ Fixed in r482. Thanks for the patch! I'll leave this issue open until the other identified leak has been followed up by someone.