15 Jan
2014
15 Jan
'14
9:56 a.m.
Hi Jason,
I am using 4.0.2
Regards,
Shankar
From: Jason Penton [mailto:jason.penton@smilecoms.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 1:21 PM
To: Shankar
Cc: SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users
Mailing List
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] FW: Regd. t_suspend() and t_continue()
Hi Shankar,
What version of Kamailio are you running? Kamailio -V
Cheers
Jason
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Shankar <shankar.rk(a)plintron.com> wrote:
Hi Jason,
Please find below my response inline,
I have some questions for you as we have used suspend/continue quite a lot
in the IMS code and don't have any leaks.
Firstly, why are you using pkg_mem for your hash_id and label? Remember that
you will be in 2 different processes in the suspend and continue portions of
the code... so pkg_mem will not work - you should use shm_mem instead.
[Shankar] We use pkg_mem because we are invoking t_continue from the same
process ( using thread ).
Secondly, how are you using top to tell that you have a leak? Kamailio's
memory is internally managed.
[Shankar] After running for say 20minutes, we get out of shared memory
error. Also in top output we observed incremental increase in the shared
usage of shared memory for the process.
Cheers
Jason
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Shankar <shankar.rk(a)plintron.com> wrote:
Re-sending without the attachment.
*From:* Shankar [mailto:shankar.rk@plintron.com]
*Sent:* Monday, January 13, 2014 4:57 PM
*To:* 'sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org'
*Subject:* Regd. t_suspend() and t_continue()
Hi,
We are trying out the t_suspend() and t_continue() in
our test setup.
We are facing memory leak ( both shm and pkg as per
top command results).
Please find below the scenario,
1) Do a t_newtran()
2) Allocate pkg memory for hashid and label.
3) Call t_suspend()
4) Do t_continue() when async result is available
5) De-allocate pkg memory reserved for hashid and
label
6) Do a t_relay() which forwards the sip message
to another sip node.
In the step (6) above, we see t_newtran() allocates
one more time
shared memory for the same transaction.
We tried t_release() after step (4) to release the
transaction as
t_relay() anyways allocates new shared memory. Nothing
helped.
Please let me know what are the logs you would require
to debug the same.
I am attaching syslog for this run.
Regards,
Shankar
--
Jason Penton
Senior Manager: Applications and Services
Smile Communications Pty (Ltd)
Mobile:
+27 (0) 83 283 7000
Skype:
jason.barry.penton
<mailto:name.surname@smilecoms.com> jason.penton(a)smilecoms.com
<http://www.smilecoms.com/> www.smilecoms.com
<http://196.33.227.129/~smlcoms/sigs/pty/images/smile_signature_07_09.jpg>
This email is subject to the disclaimer of Smile Communications at
http://www.smilecoms.com/disclaimer