| Groups | Blog | Home |
dotnet performance : memory usage minimized
I have developed an app that uses alot of double buffered forms. When minimized the app only uses about 1 meg of memory (as shown in taskmgr). Does garbage collection get triggered when you minimize? When restored, the app starts at around 8 megs, then creeps up towards 100 megs. Is this normal? Is the double buffering using garbage collected buffers or is it implemented at a lower level then then dotnet framework? just wondering, thanks ---
Yes,
The task manager is not working properly. [quoted text, click to view] <user411> wrote in message news:uiVL60GeHHA.4032@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > .Net 1.1 > > I have developed an app that uses alot of double buffered forms. When > minimized the app only uses about 1 meg of memory (as shown in taskmgr). > Does garbage collection get triggered when you minimize? > > When restored, the app starts at around 8 megs, then creeps up towards 100 > megs. Is this normal? Is the double buffering using garbage collected > buffers or is it implemented at a lower level then then dotnet framework? > > just wondering, thanks > --- > Posted via DotNetSlackers.com
When you minimize your application, Windows (not .Net, but Windows itself)
trims your working set. This means, as far as Task Manager is concerned, that you suddenly need far less memory. This is something you can do yourself, as you can read about at: http://www.coversant.com/Coversant/Blogs/tabid/88/EntryID/4/Default.aspx In all of the WinForms apps that we build these days, we use this approach to "Trim the Working Set" at strategic times. If we don't do this, we end up using 100, 200 or 300 megs of memory. By keeping the working set trimmed, our process keeps it's head low, and just chugs along. -- Chris Mullins, MCSD.NET, MCPD:Enterprise, Microsoft C# MVP http://www.coversant.com/blogs/cmullins [quoted text, click to view] <user411> wrote in message news:uiVL60GeHHA.4032@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > .Net 1.1 > > I have developed an app that uses alot of double buffered forms. When > minimized the app only uses about 1 meg of memory (as shown in taskmgr). > Does garbage collection get triggered when you minimize? > > When restored, the app starts at around 8 megs, then creeps up towards 100 > megs. Is this normal? Is the double buffering using garbage collected > buffers or is it implemented at a lower level then then dotnet framework? > > just wondering, thanks > --- > Posted via DotNetSlackers.com
[quoted text, click to view]
"Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <some guy without an email address> wrote: > how do u trim ur working set at strategic times? We know the areas that tend to dramatically expand the working set size, so we trim it just after those events. For example (this is for an Instant Messaging Client): - After login (or logout) is complete - After we create a new Chat Form (aka: Tab Page) - When a Tab Page is Closed (aka: a Conversation is closed) - When the user changes options or settings - When the user hits "Clear All" in a Chat Window There are a few other areas, but these are the big ones. In general, we attempt to shink the working set after we do events that we expect to have a signifigant impact on it. With these calls in there, the application tends to hover (in the Task Manager, which is the only thing that matters) around 10 to 20 megabytes of memory. If we're really agressive about things (using a timer etc) we can get it lower, but there is then a noticable impact on application performance. If we remove these calls completly, after the app has been running for 4 or 5 hours (it's an IM client, remember, so it runs all day long on the desktop) the memory usage hovers in the 200 to 300 megabyte range, and will sometimes go higher. ... and before you ask, we're not leaking memory. The application has been profiled a number of times with both performance and memory profilers and things look pretty good. The interaction between .Net WinForms applications and the Win32 Memory Manager seems (to me) one of the weakest areas of the overall platform. Any signifigant (any many insignifigant) application ends up taking hundreds and hundreds of megabytes of memory, even though they're not doing anything with it. This is frustrating for developers and users alike, and just plain shouldn't be happening on a platform as mature as this. -- Chris Mullins, MCSD.NET, MCPD:Enterprise, Microsoft C# MVP http://www.coversant.com/blogs/cmullins
how do u trim ur working set at strategic times?
-- Regards, Alvin Bruney ------------------------------------------------------ Shameless author plug Excel Services for .NET is coming... OWC Black book on Amazon and www.lulu.com/owc Professional VSTO 2005 - Wrox/Wiley [quoted text, click to view] "Chris Mullins [MVP]" <cmullins@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:%23RARNfPkHHA.2008@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > When you minimize your application, Windows (not .Net, but Windows itself) > trims your working set. This means, as far as Task Manager is concerned, > that you suddenly need far less memory. > > This is something you can do yourself, as you can read about at: > http://www.coversant.com/Coversant/Blogs/tabid/88/EntryID/4/Default.aspx > > In all of the WinForms apps that we build these days, we use this approach > to "Trim the Working Set" at strategic times. If we don't do this, we end > up using 100, 200 or 300 megs of memory. By keeping the working set > trimmed, our process keeps it's head low, and just chugs along. > > -- > Chris Mullins, MCSD.NET, MCPD:Enterprise, Microsoft C# MVP > http://www.coversant.com/blogs/cmullins > > <user411> wrote in message news:uiVL60GeHHA.4032@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> .Net 1.1 >> >> I have developed an app that uses alot of double buffered forms. When >> minimized the app only uses about 1 meg of memory (as shown in taskmgr). >> Does garbage collection get triggered when you minimize? >> >> When restored, the app starts at around 8 megs, then creeps up towards >> 100 megs. Is this normal? Is the double buffering using garbage collected >> buffers or is it implemented at a lower level then then dotnet framework? >> >> just wondering, thanks >> --- >> Posted via DotNetSlackers.com > >
[quoted text, click to view]
schneider <eschneider.news.ms@starkinvestments.com> wrote: > The task manager is not working properly. No, it's working properly - just not displaying what people think it displays. Certainly in Vista, task manager puts "Memory (Private Working Set)" as the column title. Once you understand what the working set is, it's clearer that task manager is working properly. -- Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
thanks
-- Regards, Alvin Bruney ------------------------------------------------------ Shameless author plug Excel Services for .NET is coming... OWC Black book on Amazon and www.lulu.com/owc Professional VSTO 2005 - Wrox/Wiley [quoted text, click to view] "Chris Mullins [MVP]" <cmullins@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:OYm8CGQkHHA.5048@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > "Alvin Bruney [MVP]" <some guy without an email address> wrote: >> how do u trim ur working set at strategic times? > > We know the areas that tend to dramatically expand the working set size, > so we trim it just after those events. For example (this is for an Instant > Messaging Client): > - After login (or logout) is complete > - After we create a new Chat Form (aka: Tab Page) > - When a Tab Page is Closed (aka: a Conversation is closed) > - When the user changes options or settings > - When the user hits "Clear All" in a Chat Window > > There are a few other areas, but these are the big ones. In general, we > attempt to shink the working set after we do events that we expect to have > a signifigant impact on it. > > With these calls in there, the application tends to hover (in the Task > Manager, which is the only thing that matters) around 10 to 20 megabytes > of memory. If we're really agressive about things (using a timer etc) we > can get it lower, but there is then a noticable impact on application > performance. > > If we remove these calls completly, after the app has been running for 4 > or 5 hours (it's an IM client, remember, so it runs all day long on the > desktop) the memory usage hovers in the 200 to 300 megabyte range, and > will sometimes go higher. > > .. and before you ask, we're not leaking memory. The application has been > profiled a number of times with both performance and memory profilers and > things look pretty good. > > The interaction between .Net WinForms applications and the Win32 Memory > Manager seems (to me) one of the weakest areas of the overall platform. > Any signifigant (any many insignifigant) application ends up taking > hundreds and hundreds of megabytes of memory, even though they're not > doing anything with it. This is frustrating for developers and users > alike, and just plain shouldn't be happening on a platform as mature as > this. > > -- > Chris Mullins, MCSD.NET, MCPD:Enterprise, Microsoft C# MVP > http://www.coversant.com/blogs/cmullins >
[quoted text, click to view]
> The interaction between .Net WinForms applications and the Win32 Memory > Manager seems (to me) one of the weakest areas of the overall platform. > Any signifigant (any many insignifigant) application ends up taking > hundreds and hundreds of megabytes of memory, even though they're not > doing anything with it. This is frustrating for developers and users > alike, and just plain shouldn't be happening on a platform as mature as > this. I think there's a faulty assumption, that unallocated memory isn't being used for anything, and therefore should be leveraged to delay garbage collection as long as possible. The missing piece of the puzzle, is that the disk cache folks noticed the abundance of unallocated memory long ago, and put it to really good use... which dramatically changes the cost-benefit of delaying garbage collection. Anything else you think comes into play here? [quoted text, click to view] > > -- > Chris Mullins, MCSD.NET, MCPD:Enterprise, Microsoft C# MVP > http://www.coversant.com/blogs/cmullins >
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |