[PD] GEM pix_write bugs (timelapse)

[Max]

Am 01.04.2009 um 15:14 schrieb IOhannes m zmoelnig:

> Max wrote:
>> here is the same thing with pix_multiimage instead.
>> it will crash pd a little bit later than the version with pix_image.
>
> i guess it is crashing right after you try loading 1000000 images  
> (or so) into RAM.
> what do you expect?

no it isn't the problem of a sequence wich is too long. it is the  
problem that the old sequence doesn't get erased from the ram.

>
> (if you look carefully, you might also notice that [pix_write]  
> gradually fills up your harddisk. this is no bug either ;-))

that aint a problem either.


> or am i missing something obvious (it seems so, as i cannot  
> reproduce the memleak you report with [pix_image] either).

well, obviously you are missing something. i hope someone can  
reproduce that with the attached patches.
run top to see the memory beeing eaten by pd. at least on os x with
GEM: ver: 0.91.3 'tigital'
GEM: compiled: Feb 23 2009


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: timelapse_multiimage.pd
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 2889 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20090402/1f838fe6/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: timelapse.pd
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 2854 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20090402/1f838fe6/attachment-0001.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: Signierter Teil der Nachricht
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20090402/1f838fe6/attachment.pgp>