On 1/8/07, tsuraan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > My first thought was that interned strings were causing the growth, > > but that doesn't seem to be the case. > > Interned strings, as of 2.3, are no longer immortal, right? The intern doc > says you have to keep a reference around to the string now, anyhow. I > really wish I could find that thing I read a year and a half ago about > python never collecting small strings, but I just can't find it anymore. > Maybe it's time for me to go source diving... > >
I remember something about it coming up in some of the discussions of free lists and better behavior in this regard in 2.5, but I don't remember the details. Interned strings aren't supposed to be immortal, these strings shouldn't be automatically interned anyway (and my brief testing seemed to bear that out) and calling _Py_ReleaseInternedStrings didn't recover any memory, so I'm pretty sure interning is not the culprit. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list