[Zope] Minimal Zope Install - True Story

[Pavlos Christoforou]

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Michel Pelletier wrote:

> Only current revisions of objects are ever activated, so this is not a
> good measure.  There is generally no correlation between Data.fs size

Michel I am not seeking a good measure. I am seeking an easily estimated
upper limit given that my Zope accesses no files on the filesystem and has
no external components active (DAs, etc). Including all objects in
Data.fs, current revisions or not, makes my estimation easier.

> and memory consumption.  Also, the size of an object when serialized
> (pickled in the Data.fs file) does not correlate to the size of the
> object in memory in any straightforward way.

Correlation might not be straightforward but upper limit estimation should
be. cPickle is a binary representation of the instance data plus a lot of
extra info declaring types etc. Ignoring cached objects/data coming from
external sources (RDBM, etc) which I don't have, then the pickled version
of the object should place an approximate upper limit for its RAM usage,
unless during object activation/utilization the object requires a lot of
RAM to do its job (Catalog comes to mind).  Or for instance if you have a
__setstate__ method that does something like: 

for i in range(1000):
	a.append(a*100)

In anycase any activity under the above constrains which increases RAM
usage indefinetely is IMO a memory leak.

Pavlos