I have a question about WebktGTK.
These days I am making a program which is can analysis web page if has suspicious web content.
When "load-failed" "load-changed" signal is emitted with WEBKIT_LOAD_FINISHED,
The program anlaysis the next page continuously by calling webkit_web_view_load_uri again again.
(http://webkitgtk.org/reference/webkit2gtk/stable/WebKitWebView.html#webkit-web-view-load-uri)
The question want to ask you is memory problem.
The more the program analsysis the webpages, The more WebKitWebProcess is bigger.
webkit_back_forward_list_get_length() return value also increased by analysising web pages. Where shoud I free memory?
Do you know how Can I solve this problem or Could give me any advice where Can I get advice?
Thank you very much :-) Have a nice day ^^
In theory, what you're doing is perfectly fine, and you shouldn't need to change your code at all. In practice, WebKit has a lot of memory leaks, and programatically loading many new URIs in the same web view is eventually going to be problematic, as you've found.
My recommendation is to periodically, every so many page loads, create a new web view that uses a separate web process, and destroy the original web view. (That will also reset the back/forward list to stop it from growing, though I suspect the memory lost to the back/forward list is probably not significant compared to memory leaks when rendering the page.) I filed Bug 151203 - [GTK] Start a new web process when calling webkit_web_view_load functions? to consider having this happen automatically; your issue indicates we may need to bump the priority on that. In the meantime, you'll have to do it manually:
Before doing anything else in your application, set the process model to WEBKIT_PROCESS_MODEL_MULTIPLE_SECONDARY_PROCESSES using webkit_web_context_set_process_model(). (If you are not creating your own web contexts, you'll need to use the default web context webkit_web_context_get_default().)
Periodically destroy your web view with gtk_widget_destroy(), then create a new one using webkit_web_view_new() et. al. and attach it somewhere in your widget hierarchy. (Be sure NOT to use webkit_web_view_new_with_related_view() as that's how you get two web views to use the same web process.)
If you have trouble getting that solution to work, an extreme alternative would be to periodically send SIGTERM to your web process to get a new one. Connect to WebKitWebView::web-process-crashed, and call webkit_web_view_load_uri() from there. That will result in the same web view using a new web process.
Related
Currently i'm working on a security monitoring app that continuously monitor new processes created.
For that im using wim and event watcher, witch works fine in VB.NET.
But there are 2 features that im missing.
I need to monitor process API calls, and I've been searching the web like mad, and come up empty.
Basically i need to monitor process WaitForSingleObject, LoadLibraryA, CreateProcessW and WriteProcessMemory. And registry access/changes as well.
Im hoping this can be done without a system wide hook, but form what i can find, it cannot be done via WMI.
So the question is, how to, and what can i do with managed code.
I'm gonna focus on the second point as i don't have experience on your first.
For checking if a process is signed i am using the sigcheck.exe from Mark Russinovich, because of the various methods it uses to verify files. Some are catalogsigned, some have the key embedded, there is iirc another weird method. There is no easy way to do it yourself. Had weird false detections with trying self-built methods to cover all possibilities. Hope that info helps
We have a Seaside Application in place that creates a session and handles user login etc. So we're happy with that.
But we'd like to have the ability to serve a few pages using a fixed url. This is not a problem using #initialRequest: and delegating to a certain component depending on the url. What I'd like to avoid, however, is that some of these pages create a new session and start up all the machinery that's coming with it.
Any ideas?
Seaside 2
You could create a WASession (or WAMain) subclass which will be used if the request was static. Then in that session (or main) you could override those methods that do too much for your liking.
Seaside 3
You could use the new filter mechanism. If I recall correctly you can take control of the request pretty much at any time. That should give you enough leverage to do what you want.
Or if you don't need session state, just subclass WARequestHandler and register an instance somewhere in your handler tree (presumably in a WADispatcher).
There's some messiness currently if you want to use a Canvas for rendering but there should be some examples in the image.
I am new to WinRT and was playing around with session state. I am navigating to a page to collect data and then want to return to the main page. Just before navigation I am using:
SuspensionManager.SessionState["CurrentState"] = someObject;
The object contains lists of other mildly complex objects, etc... All seems to be working but is this the correct way to use the Suspension Manager?
I have looked at other posts on the topic and some people report that it is necessary to use [DataContract] and [DataMember] attributes to all the classes that are serialized. I omitted them and it still works, (getting the data across pages). So what is the recommended approach?
I may be reading too much into one aspect your question, but the role of SuspensionManager and SessionState is to store just enough information to bring your application back to the place the user left it if the application is actually terminated while it's suspended.
In the Windows 8 application lifecycle, your app gets 'suspended' if another app comes to the foreground. While your app is suspended all of its state is retained in memory, and if reactivated (you flip back to it) everything* is restored "for free".
A suspended app could, however, also be terminated by the OS (b/c of memory pressure, for instance) and there is no opportunity to react to that scenario in your app, so what you are really doing with SessionState is storing what's necessary to 'recreate' the last place the user was at IF the application had actually terminated. It's essentially an insurance policy: if the application is merely suspended, SessionState isn't really needed.
The 'what's necessary' is the grey area, I could store all of the information about say a user profile that was in progress OR I could save just the userid that indexes into my persistent storage of all the user profile data. I generally have more of a minimalist view and will retain as little as possible in SessionState - I make the analogy that I don't need to remember everything, I only need to remember how/where to get/find everything.
There's an implication as well in your question that you're using SessionState to pass information between pages in your app, and that's not really the intent. Each page of your app is typically connected with a view model, and when you interact with a page of that app, you'd update the view model and drive additional screens and experiences from the changes already in the view model. Leaving one screen of your app and returning the main one would also imply to me that you've persisted what ever information you collected - certainly to the view model, but also to something persistent like a data base or local storage. When you revisit that page, you'd then pull the data back out of your view model (or that persistent storage); the main page doesn't need that information so why hold on to it?
Lastly, since you mentioned being new to WinRT, you may want to check out App Builder, which pulls together a number of resources in consumable chunks to lead you through building an app over a period of 30-days (though all material is available, so you can consume at any pace you want :)) The discussion of lifecycle management that's germane to your question comes in on Day 17 of that sequence.
*"everything is restored for free" doesn't necessarily mean you don't have any work to do when an app comes out of the suspended state. There may be stale data that requires refreshing, and connections or other transient or short-lived entities may need to be refreshed/recreated.
I'm testing performance in my application, to see how it behaves with
a big load of data inside of it. My application is core data based and
uses array controllers in entity mode to fetch data.
What I discovered is that my app fetched all the managed objects
present in core data, so I set the fetch predicate of array
controllers at startup. This reduced dramatically the number of
objects fetched. The problem though is that my app still takes a lot
of time to start when is full of data.
I ran the app within instruments, and the core data fetches instrument
confirms that this is not the problem (my app fetches only 20-30
objects when starts). But running it under Shark I can see that for
4-5 seconds after startup the only call on the stack is to the app
managed object context. So I think it has something to do with
interaction between managed object context and data stored, even if I
don't fetch all the data. If I empty the app or leave little data
inside of it, it starts very quickly.
Does somebody know why this happens? Am I missing something obvious?
Why does it take so much to the managed object context to load if I
only fetch few objects? I always read that core data scales well and
the programming guide states that 10.000 objects are not much for core
data, but in my app it makes a big difference, so I'm wondering where
I am wrong.
amazing!
Just seconds after asking this questionI find the problem root and solve it !
Just for peoples who may face this problem :
you need to enable Use Lazy Fetching at the Object Controller for each NSArray Controller that you used in your application to solve the performance problem using core data managed object context
and here you go !
application starts as fast as you click on it !
I am developing a Cocoa Mac app which dynamically generates and registers itself for URL schemes. However, when the application registers itself to handle a newly generated URL scheme (e.g. myscheme1423://), I would like to prevent the application from responding to any previously registered URL schemes.
I am using LSSetDefaultHandlerForURLScheme() for the purpose of registering a URL scheme; in conjunction, the application automatically overwrites it's Info.plist to contain the new scheme. As you may know, the LSSetDefaultHandlerForURLScheme() function adds the given bundleID/scheme to a Launch Services database. However, I couldn't find an equivalent Launch Services function to remove the same bundleID/scheme pair from the database.
I know that I could simply ignore any external events which originated from a URL scheme other than the one for which the app is actively registered, but it feels to me that there should be a simple way to completely wipe out the system's knowledge of the previous scheme. If my application goes through the process of registering for a new scheme more than a few hundred times, a point will come where a significant amount of space (for a Plist, at least) is being taken up on disk by a plethora of pointless pieces of data (i.e. the old Launch Services entries).
I just fired up a playground and began playing. This is utterly undocumented but it appears to work.
Try passing ("None" as CFString) for the second parameter of
LSSetDefaultHandlerForURLScheme()