xmlgraphics-fop-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mahesh Rayudu <mahesh.ray...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Memory usage and page numbering...
Date Sat, 10 Aug 2013 23:55:08 GMT
Hi,

I noticed memory leak issue in font complex-scripts features with trunk
code. Not seen any memory issues with page numbers/totals. I tested my code
on Mac 10.7 and CentOS 6.4 with visualvm profiler.

Thank you,
Mahesh


On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Bernard Giannetti <
thebernmeister@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have a Java desktop application, using embedded FOP to create PDFs from
> a data XML file and an XSLT file.  I wanted to see how much memory is being
> used, given the point about memory usage, page numbers and page totals (
> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/1.1/running.html#memory).
>
> My PDF reports have a "page N of TOTAL" at the bottom right of each page
> and I wanted to see the memory usage and compare to no page numbers and
> just page numbers without totals.  I also used the two variations for page
> number totals (XSL 1.0 and XSL 1.1).
>
> To work out the memory usage I computed the difference when
> calling Runtime.getRuntime().freeMemory() at the start and end of the
> render process.  I ran each render variation 5 times from a shell script
> and each render kicked off a separate JVM to avoid any caching.  Regardless
> of whether I had page numbers or not, and page totals or not, it seemed the
> result is that there is no difference between having page numbers/totals or
> not.  Sometimes the memory usage was 50 MB and sometimes 200 MB.
>
> I then used the sample code and data files from embedded FOP,
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/tags/fop-1_1/examples/embedding/.
>  I modified the data XML file to contain lots of entries, giving a data
> file size of about 1 MB.  I also modified the XLST file to include pages
> numbers and then also page totals.  Again, I noticed no difference in
> memory usage.
>
> Given the varying values for memory usage I'm seeing, I assume my quick
> and dirty method is inadequate.  I expected variation, but mostly to see
> far less memory usage when no page totals were used, but that's not the
> case.
>
> Has anyone seen similar results?  Does using page totals really use THAT
> much more memory compared to not using page totals?
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Bernard.
>

Mime
View raw message