logo
down
shadow

What is the Difference between GC.GetTotalMemory(false) and GC.GetTotalMemory(true)


What is the Difference between GC.GetTotalMemory(false) and GC.GetTotalMemory(true)

By : drewgbarnes
Date : January 02 2021, 06:48 AM
I hope this helps you . The parameter defines whether or not to wait till a full garbage collection happens before running or not.
See MSDN: Parameters
code :


Share : facebook icon twitter icon
C# WPF application is using too much memory while GC.GetTotalMemory() is low

C# WPF application is using too much memory while GC.GetTotalMemory() is low


By : Anupam
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
This might help you Solved the problem.
Just had to replace BitmapCacheOption.OnLoad with BitmapCacheOption.None :)
C# - GC.GetTotalMemory() Question

C# - GC.GetTotalMemory() Question


By : user3543985
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
this will help Only if it's a purely managed-memory application. If any of it is calling off to unmanaged code, the memory allocated there will never be registered with the garbage collector (unless someone remembers to call GC.AddMemoryPressure).
GetTotalMemory allocation in C

GetTotalMemory allocation in C


By : Andy Flack
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
Hope that helps I am, not aware of any c standard library functions which can help you achieve this. AFAIK, there don't exist any. But you can use some sort of an hack, One should not use this in release builds but for debug and diagnostic purpose only.
You can use what I call malloc overloading in c. You do this with the help of macros.
code :
void* my_malloc(size_t size, const char *file, int line, const char *func)
{

    void *p = malloc(size);
    printf ("Allocated = %s, %i, %s, %p[%li]\n", file, line, func, p, size);

    /*Link List functionality goes in here*/

    return p;
}

#define malloc(X) my_malloc( X, __FILE__, __LINE__, __FUNCTION__)
Does GC.GetTotalMemory(false) synchronize threads

Does GC.GetTotalMemory(false) synchronize threads


By : DugenHiser
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
help you fix your problem No. This doesn't make much difference.
The result will be the same from any of the running threads, because it's reporting on a resource shared by all threads, and the GC generally does enough synchronisation to ensure this works (e.g. two threads simultaneously needing more heap memory won't throw it into an invalid state). Finding the amount of memory thought to be allocated doesn't require locking up all the threads, though it might require locking on some other GC operations.
GC.GetTotalMemory use and its return value

GC.GetTotalMemory use and its return value


By : Rick_S
Date : March 29 2020, 07:55 AM
around this issue Is the assumption that by assigning obj to the index [1] in the array o that it would take a substantial number of bytes? All you are doing is assigning a reference. Not only that, but all that new Object[1000000] did was create an array (space to associate 1,000,000 Object's and the memory required by Object[].), not allocate 1,000,000 Object's. I am sure someone can elaborate even more about the internal data structures being used and why 4 bytes shows up.
The key thing to realize is that assigned obj to o[1] is not allocating additional memory for obj. If you are trying to determine an approximation call GC.GetTotalMemory before obj is allocated, then after. In your test obj is already allocated before you call the first GC.GetTotalMemory
shadow
Privacy Policy - Terms - Contact Us © 35dp-dentalpractice.co.uk