Excessive memory usage (reversible) in links browser

[tinypoodle]

Found links in graphics mode using X with RES mem usage 99284 KB  
3 windows, last one was open since max. 2 days.
After closing last opened window RES mem usage dropped to 20260 KB
After hitting "Flush all caches" RES mem usage further dropped to 9004 KB
I only thought about looking at "Resources info" after I already had closed last opened window...

[curaga]

Please report any bugs upstream as well.

[Jason W]

Debian, Ubuntu, and Gentoo use the same 2.3pre1 version, and neither uses a patch for memory leak nor do I see it mentioned in any open bugs related to it.  

Doesn't mean that there is not a leak, I am just going to hold off on downgrading back to 2.2.  I will open a window, surf a little, and leave it open the next few days while I am gone and see if I observe the same behavior.

[tinypoodle]

Can reproduce:

uploading file of 5657 KB as webmail attachment

RES mem before: 9008 KB
                  after: 76952 KB
                  after saving mail as draft: 99600 KB
                  after closing window: 20332 KB
                  flush all caches --> 9008 KB

2 windows are permanently open since at least 5 days.
So it is not a mem leakage of the app per se in the sense of being irreversible.

[bmarkus]

Isn't it just a cache which is causing a typical LINUX question, why free RAM is so low when nothing is running... ?

[tinypoodle]

Big difference between the two:
System cache would never show as RES mem usage, and is not in an obvious way associated to any particular app.
I am referring to links' application internal cache which can be freed from menu.

It is a limitation of busybox 'free' not to show how much of used mem is cache.
Particularly in TC 'sudo cache-clear' can be used to free RAM from cache.

[tinypoodle]

Jason,
as you mentioned downgrading...
I am keeping links 2.1pre28 for the particular reason that this is the latest version including (whatever limited) javascript support.
Same behaviour can be reproduced.
So I don't think there is any reason bothering about downgrading.

[Jason W]

Judging by the additional info and some of my own tests, though brief ones, I think we are good to stay put.

I agree that it most likely not an actual memory leak, but rather the way links is using and freeing resources.

[tinypoodle]

Topic title (subject of first post) modified accordingly.

BTW, hitting "Flush all caches" without closing window would bring it down to ~44000 KB.
I could at no point observe any particularly increased values in "Resources info"

[ACRizona]

Why did you install the LINKS browser ?  Quicker ? Lighter ?

Somewhere between Dillo and Firefox,,, I'm pleased with Midori.
But I'm still wanting a simple fast browser.

Your comments welcomed.

[tinypoodle]

That's a very generic question.
I'd invite you to read documentation of links2 to see all of its features and its capacities (many of them unique).

Personally I have never used midori, and checking it's dependency chain I have no appetite to try, it has sure a significantly way bigger footstep compared to firefox (which I have used in the past but gave up on it since a long time).

(midori = 36.71MB; firefox = 22.36MB; links [with graphics support] = 3.85MB; all incl. deps)