Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

As package author of the memory-extensive package pgfplots, I have been asked to analyze some out-of-memory situation.

I could identify the "culprit"; it was some call to \pdfmdfivesum in which it crashed finally.

I am aware of some solutions how to enlarge or avoid memory limits, so please avoid suggestions how to avoid the problem.

My motivation here is: as a software engineer, I wished for some kind of "heap dump" in which I can inspect how much memory is currently being occupied by which "word" or whatever. This could hopefully allow optimizations and systematic improvements; i.e. by clearing unused registers or by restructuring macro expansion or whatever.

Do you know if human-readable heap dumps can be generated?


Here is some more insight into the problem that I tried to address.

Personally, I think that this section is more or less unrelated to the question above: I would really like to hear answers even if there is a simple solution to the problem at hand.

Anyway, if you see how to improve the situation, I would listen carefully.

The problem at hand was the main memory size. Apparently, matlab2tikz generated a 300k file containing a self-contained pgfplots figure along with (lots of!) data points. And the tikz external library attempted to load that file into main memory in order to compute its MD5 hash. This failed. Note that without the MD5 computation, the file could be processed. In fact, the tikz external lib uses \edef\pgfretval{\pdfmdfivesum{\meaning\tikzexternal@temp}} and the call to \meaning fails if \tikzexternal@temp contains these 300k words. I suppose that these words occur more than once in the main memory of TeX; and I would like to learn where and why. This is where I hoped to see a heap dump.

Runaway definition?
->
! TeX capacity exceeded, sorry [main memory size=3000000].
\tikzexternal@hashfct ...aning \tikzexternal@temp 
                                                  }
l.105 \end{tikzpicture}
                       %
If you really absolutely need more capacity,
you can ask a wizard to enlarge me.


Here is how much of TeX's memory you used:
 18462 strings out of 494578
 804304 string characters out of 3169744
 3000001 words of memory out of 3000000
 21352 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+200000
share|improve this question
3  
There is no need to load the external file into a macro. \pdfmdfivesum has an optional keyword file that allows the computation of MD5 for an external file. See also \pdf@filemdfivesum of package pdftexcmds that adds support for LuaTeX. –  Heiko Oberdiek Apr 5 '13 at 15:30
    
@HeikoOberdiek thanks for the note... I considered using that part. However, at that point where I have to compute the MD5, I have already read the file. I would have to generate a tmp file and reread that one (the procedure is triggered at \begin{tikzpicture}). –  Christian Feuersänger Apr 6 '13 at 6:54
2  
Would a LuaTeX solution be OK? I am not sure if it's possible, but in case you'd be OK with a LuaTeX answer I could put some blood into my brain and try to get it to work. –  topskip Apr 24 '13 at 19:05
    
@topskip Sure, a LuaTeX solution would be fine with me. After all, it would contain the same memory hot spots caused by my package. –  Christian Feuersänger Apr 24 '13 at 19:51
8  
You should not be using \meaning here: it turns something like \relax, a single token, into 7 character tokens, exploding the size. It should cause decidedly less churn to write something like \pdfmdfivesum{\unexpanded\expandafter{\tikzexternal@temp}} to get an appropriate value. That way, one token stays one token, so the memory requirements "only" double. Plus what is taken from the string pool temporarily. With regard to debugging: you can set \tracingstats to a positive value and look at the log file using almost-failing input sizes. Not exactly fabulous. –  user31698 Jun 3 '13 at 19:38

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

TeX's core engine does not use dynamically allocated memory but preallocated memory pools. So there's nothing like a heap to get dumped.

The TeX base code does not provide a way to show the contents and pointers into the preallocated memory pools. So the answer to your question is: No, its impossible to generate a "usefull" TeX heap dump (which should be called memory pool dump). With LuaTeX it might be possible, as it does not use TeXs base code but a rewritten engine.

To extend TeX memory you can edit/customize the configuration file texmf.cnf and regenerate your formats in the tex -ini steps of your TeX Installation. That's why a wizard is needed here. But most times its better to rethink the tokenization of your TeX code.

share|improve this answer
    
I think you should have a look at the comments under the question too. This is not what is asked. –  percusse Jun 8 at 9:13
    
I think that exactly answers what is asked and why this question has so many votes. I don't think that many people have exactly the same problem, but ask themselves, if there is a method to debug allocations or to see the what is allocated in the memory pools aka. heap. And the answer is: No, there is no such method. I approved that by reading the original pascal source code of tex! –  ikrabbe Jun 8 at 12:18
    
I mean the author already is aware of such limitation of TeX and asks for any way to do it possibly with the new features of Lua or Xe LaTeX. It is not difficult to come to the conclusion you have given here with the question itself and the comments under it already. What you have briefly suggested here is already reported extensively in the authors package manual pgfplots. Thus this is rather trivial info for the task at hand. See the third paragraph especially. –  percusse Jun 8 at 12:23
    
It's not only pgfplot which can lead to that question and I asked similar myself about twenty years ago. The way TeX handles its memory is solitary and worth to take a look at. –  ikrabbe Jun 8 at 12:27
    
Please reread my comment. –  percusse Jun 8 at 12:27

protected by Community May 27 '14 at 9:16

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality answers, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site.

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.