A. Libotean added the comment:
Can we close this issue then?
Yes, please. Sorry for the false alarm.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22272
___
Changes by STINNER Victor victor.stin...@gmail.com:
--
resolution: - not a bug
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22272
___
A. Libotean added the comment:
I'm not sure that it's a leak because it doesn't depend on the number of
queries nor the number of run of the test. It's maybe an internal sqlite
cache.
You're right, the leak does not increase past ~300 queries executed.
--
Ned Deily added the comment:
Can we close this issue then?
--
nosy: +ned.deily
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22272
___
___
New submission from A. Libotean:
There are significant memory leaks when multiple insert statements are executed
with distinct values.
sqlite3 version is 2.6.0
The attached file contains two variants:
* one which uses string interpolation to build the query: this generates severe
leakeage
*
Changes by STINNER Victor victor.stin...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +haypo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue22272
___
___
Python-bugs-list
STINNER Victor added the comment:
leaking_tracemalloc.py: leaking.py adapted for tracemalloc.
Output:
[ Top 3 lines ]
leaking_tracemalloc.py:24: size=46.0 KiB (+46.0 KiB), count=476 (+476),
average=99 B
leaking_tracemalloc.py:17: size=847 B (+847 B), count=6 (+6), average=141 B
