Profile os.walk memory usage on _delete_dir_tree
Bug #539659 reported by
Natalia Bidart
This bug affects 1 person
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ubuntu One Client |
Fix Released
|
Medium
|
Ubuntu One Foundations+ team | ||
Bug Description
_delete_dir_tree uses os.walk (http://
We should consider using os.listdir instead.
| Changed in ubuntuone-client: | |
| assignee: | nobody → Ubuntu One Foundations+ team (ubuntuone-foundations+) |
| importance: | Undecided → Medium |
| tags: | added: u1-lucid |
| tags: | added: package |
| tags: | added: chicharra |
Revision history for this message
| Facundo Batista (facundo) wrote | #1 |
Revision history for this message
| Facundo Batista (facundo) wrote | #2 |
Revision history for this message
| Facundo Batista (facundo) wrote | #3 |
Revision history for this message
| Facundo Batista (facundo) wrote | #4 |
| Changed in ubuntuone-client: | |
| status: | Confirmed → Fix Released |
To post a comment you must log in.
We have no problem in this respect, according to the analysis I just did.
I profiled memory (using the attached script) on a os.walk() on the kernel sources, and the worst pike (curve attached) was of 50kB.
The kernel (linux-2.6.32) sources had, at the moment I downloaded it, 1959 directories and 31214 files, with a max depth level of 9, and proved to be a good example for other benchmarks.
Also tested it with a wide but not deep structure (deep 4, width 40, in the script), and a deep but not wide one (deep 40, width 10).
As you can see in both attached curves, worst pike is 11kB in one case, and 55kB in the other. Memory usage grows linearly with tree depth, but let's agree that a tree depth of 40 is a little extreme.