[Haskell-beginners] Space leak while reading from a file?
Jan Snajder
jan.snajder at fer.hr
Sun May 11 11:24:39 UTC 2014
Dear all,
I'm trying to implement a simple file-based database. I apparently have
a space leak, but I have no clue where it comes from.
Here's the file-based database implementation:
http://pastebin.com/QqiqcXFw
The idea to have a database table in a single textual file. One line
equals one table row. The fields within a row are whitespace separated.
The first field is the key. Because I'd like to work with large files, I
don't want to load the whole file into memory. Instead, I'd like to be
able to fetch the rows on demand, by keys. Thus I first create an index
that links keys to file seeks. I use the readerT to add the index to the
IO monad.
For testing, I use a dummy table produced as follows:
import System.IO
import Text.Printf
import Control.Monad
row = unwords [printf "field%03d" (i::Int) | i <- [1..999]]
main = do
forM_ [1..250000] $ \i ->
putStrLn $ printf "row%06d %s" (i::Int) row
This generates a 2.1G textual file, which I store on my disk.
The testing code:
import FileDB
import qualified Data.Text as T
import Text.Printf
import Control.Applicative
import Control.Monad
import Control.Monad.Trans
import System.IO
import System.Environment
main = do
(f:_) <- getArgs
t <- openTable f
runDB t $ do
ks <- getKeys
liftIO $ do
putStrLn . printf "%d keys read" $ length ks
putStrLn "Press any key to continue..."
getChar
forM_ ks $ \k -> do
Just r <- getRow k
liftIO . putStrLn $ printf "Row \"%s\" has %d fields"
(T.unpack k) (length r)
When I run the test on the 2.1GB file, the whole program consumes 10GB.
6GB seem to be allocated after the index is built (just before entering
the forM_ function). The remaining 4GB are allocated while fetching all
the rows.
I find both things difficult to explain.
6GB seems too much for the index. Each key is 9 characters (stored as
Data.Text), and I have 250K such keys in a Data.Map. Should this really
add up to 6GB?
Also, I have no idea why fetching all the rows, one by one, should
consume any additional memory. Each row is fetched and its length is
computed and printed out. I see no reason for the rows to be retained in
the memory.
Here's the memory allocation summary:
> 1,093,931,338,632 bytes allocated in the heap
> 2,225,144,704 bytes copied during GC
> 4,533,898,000 bytes maximum residency (26 sample(s))
> 3,080,926,336 bytes maximum slop
> 10004 MB total memory in use (0 MB lost due to fragmentation)
>
> Tot time (elapsed) Avg pause Max
pause
> Gen 0 2171739 colls, 0 par 45.29s 45.26s 0.0000s
0.0030s
> Gen 1 26 colls, 0 par 1.50s 1.53s 0.0589s
0.7087s
>
> INIT time 0.00s ( 0.00s elapsed)
> MUT time 279.92s (284.85s elapsed)
> GC time 46.80s ( 46.79s elapsed)
> EXIT time 0.68s ( 0.71s elapsed)
> Total time 327.40s (332.35s elapsed)
>
> %GC time 14.3% (14.1% elapsed)
>
> Alloc rate 3,908,073,170 bytes per MUT second
>
> Productivity 85.7% of total user, 84.4% of total elapsed
Btw., I don't get the "bytes allocated in the heap" figure, which is
approx. 1000 GB (?).
I'm obviously doing something wrong here. I'd be thankful for any help.
Best,
Jan
More information about the Beginners
mailing list