In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you actually want to free the memory, you need to undef it. The
> untie prevents it from persisting, but the memory stays allocated
> unless you undef.
OK, I think I'm probably handling this properly then, after a
Andrew Green wrote:
> In particular, I'm
> looking for reassurance that passing a reference to a hash doesn't copy
> the hash itself into memory in any way, and that the memory overhead is
> only as large as the largest $item.
That's basically correct, but some dbm implementations will use their
Morning all,
Forgive the naivete, but I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around the
memory implications of using tied hashes, and I haven't found anything in
the Camel book or the Guide to clarify the situation for me.
A fair amount of my Registry scripts need to use code not unlike the
followi
