|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's a demo of an animation render that leaks memory.
Rotate 2000 spheres about a cylinder while looking down on it.
Mem VM
13,736 7,220 pvengine64.exe @ boot
170,732 169,588 after run #1 (1m 54s)
313,056 313,644 after run #2 (1m 54s)
(standard 640x480 size selected in the dropdown)
//-------------------------------------------------------------
povwin command line:
leaktest.ini +SF1 +EF240 -GA
//-------------------------------------------------------------
leaktest.ini:
Input_File_Name = leaktest.pov
Width = 720
Height = 480
Quality = 9
Final_Frame = 240
//-------------------------------------------------------------
leaktest.pov:
// leaktest.pov
// Make an animation for clipka to demonstrate povwin leaks
// 240 frames
#version 3.7;
global_settings{ assumed_gamma 1.0 }
#default{ finish{ ambient 0.1 diffuse 0.9 }}
#include "colors.inc"
#declare Camera_0 = camera {perspective angle 75
location <0.0 , 50.0 ,-3.0>
right x*image_width/image_height
look_at <0.0 , 1.0 , 0.0>}
camera{Camera_0}
light_source{< 3000,3000,-3000> color White}
plane { <0,1,0>, 0
texture { pigment {White}}
}
// Move a float: from, to, increment
#macro MoveF(_from, _to, __i)
(_from+((_to-_from)*__i))
#end
#declare Rpos=seed(300);
#declare _maxY=20;
#declare _z = 10;
#local _i=0;
#while (_i<2000)
#local _startRot=rand(Rpos);
#local _endRot=rand(Rpos);
sphere { <0,0,0>, rand(Rpos)*2+.5
texture {pigment{ color Red }}
translate<0,rand(Rpos)*_maxY,_z>
rotate y*MoveF(_startRot, _endRot, clock)*360
}
#local _i=_i+1;
#end
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 2016-05-08 01:37, also sprach dick balaska:
Am 2016-05-05 22:50, also sprach clipka:
> Feel free to email any helpful animation scenes to "christoph", at
> "lipka-koeln" in the "de" domain.
"Does not follow instructions."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.05.2016 um 07:37 schrieb dick balaska:
> Here's a demo of an animation render that leaks memory.
For starters, I can confirm that it shows significantly different
behaviour than my tests.
I'll have a closer look at why that might be.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.05.2016 um 16:05 schrieb clipka:
> Am 08.05.2016 um 07:37 schrieb dick balaska:
>> Here's a demo of an animation render that leaks memory.
>
> For starters, I can confirm that it shows significantly different
> behaviour than my tests.
>
> I'll have a closer look at why that might be.
... and got it.
A true genuine solid memory hole indeed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.05.2016 um 16:48 schrieb clipka:
> Am 08.05.2016 um 16:05 schrieb clipka:
>> Am 08.05.2016 um 07:37 schrieb dick balaska:
>>> Here's a demo of an animation render that leaks memory.
>>
>> For starters, I can confirm that it shows significantly different
>> behaviour than my tests.
>>
>> I'll have a closer look at why that might be.
>
> .... and got it.
>
> A true genuine solid memory hole indeed.
Windows binaries will be available in approx. 30 minutes at:
https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.7.1-alpha.8600570
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 08/05/2016 17:12, clipka a écrit :
> Am 08.05.2016 um 16:48 schrieb clipka:
>> Am 08.05.2016 um 16:05 schrieb clipka:
>>> Am 08.05.2016 um 07:37 schrieb dick balaska:
>>>> Here's a demo of an animation render that leaks memory.
>>>
>>> For starters, I can confirm that it shows significantly different
>>> behaviour than my tests.
>>>
>>> I'll have a closer look at why that might be.
>>
>> .... and got it.
>>
>> A true genuine solid memory hole indeed.
>
> Windows binaries will be available in approx. 30 minutes at:
> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.7.1-alpha.8600570
>
Does it impact stable or only master ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.05.2016 um 17:18 schrieb Le_Forgeron:
> Le 08/05/2016 17:12, clipka a écrit :
>> Am 08.05.2016 um 16:48 schrieb clipka:
>>> Am 08.05.2016 um 16:05 schrieb clipka:
>>>> Am 08.05.2016 um 07:37 schrieb dick balaska:
>>>>> Here's a demo of an animation render that leaks memory.
>>>>
>>>> For starters, I can confirm that it shows significantly different
>>>> behaviour than my tests.
>>>>
>>>> I'll have a closer look at why that might be.
>>>
>>> .... and got it.
>>>
>>> A true genuine solid memory hole indeed.
>>
>> Windows binaries will be available in approx. 30 minutes at:
>> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.7.1-alpha.8600570
>>
>
> Does it impact stable or only master ?
3.7.0 was fine; it's a leak I must have introduced later during one of
my refactoring sprees.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 2016-05-08 11:12, also sprach clipka:
>>
>> A true genuine solid memory hole indeed.
>
> Windows binaries will be available in approx. 30 minutes at:
> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.7.1-alpha.8600570
>
WORKSFORME
thanks
--
dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 08.05.2016 um 17:18 schrieb Le_Forgeron:
> > Le 08/05/2016 17:12, clipka a écrit :
> >> Am 08.05.2016 um 16:48 schrieb clipka:
> >>> Am 08.05.2016 um 16:05 schrieb clipka:
> >>>> Am 08.05.2016 um 07:37 schrieb dick balaska:
> >>>>> Here's a demo of an animation render that leaks memory.
> >>>>
> >>>> For starters, I can confirm that it shows significantly different
> >>>> behaviour than my tests.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'll have a closer look at why that might be.
> >>>
> >>> .... and got it.
> >>>
> >>> A true genuine solid memory hole indeed.
> >>
> >> Windows binaries will be available in approx. 30 minutes at:
> >> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.7.1-alpha.8600570
> >>
> >
> > Does it impact stable or only master ?
>
> 3.7.0 was fine; it's a leak I must have introduced later during one of
> my refactoring sprees.
And you would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those kids!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 09.05.2016 um 07:37 schrieb jhu:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> 3.7.0 was fine; it's a leak I must have introduced later during one of
>> my refactoring sprees.
>
> And you would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those kids!
Yeah; pesky brats, they ruin everything. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |