-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 57
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
memory consumption for 1.9.0 #79
Comments
Thanks for reporting this. 2.0.0 will most likely have a similar memory usage as the base64 change is in there as well. |
None of the differences between 1.8 and 1.9 should have caused this. Did you check v1.8 instead of v1.9? |
Nevermind about 1.8, I thought that was the release with the lazy regexp. The only difference in v1.9 is that the That's not a change we would want to back out... |
Thank you for taking a look. All I know is that on October 10 at noon our CI went from green to red with "JavaScript heap out of memory" with nothing that changed on the code itself. this is exactly when v1.9.0 is released. We are not using a lock file so the caret range picks new minor versions up automatically. |
@phated - this might be related to this bug in node. Seems like moving to node's Buffer is now allocating the memory in a heap space that is not reclaimed by the GC, and only cleaned up by the event loop when the synchronous code finishes. |
I am a maintainer of
opentelemetry-js-contrib
repo.Recently, our browser tests started failing due to "JavaScript heap out of memory" when running webpack.
After doing some digging, I found that we are using this webpack loader @jsdevtools/coverage-istanbul-loader and it is causing the memory issues.
When I examined its dependencies, I see that it has a caret dependency on this package:
Which now automatically picks up version
1.9.0
. It was released to npm on October 10 which is just when our CI started failing due to out of memory.By comparing version 1.8.0 and 1.9.0, I found that it did some changes in decoding base64 which might be related.
I can see that you already published a new major version
2.0.0
, but we cannot use it as this package is not a direct dependency for our project.We will probably just increase our node memory in CI to work around this issue, but I wanted to document it here for anyone who might have the same issue and end up here.
Wondering if the change in #74 might have a memory leak or now consumes more memory than it used to?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: