What is private bytes, virtual bytes, working set?

问题:

I am trying to use the perfmon windows utility to debug memory leaks in a process.

This is how perfmon explains the terms:

Working Set is the current size, in bytes, of the Working Set of this process. The Working Set is the set of memory pages touched recently by the threads in the process. If free memory in the computer is above a threshold, pages are left in the Working Set of a process even if they are not in use. When free memory falls below a threshold, pages are trimmed from Working Sets. If they are needed they will then be soft-faulted back into the Working Set before leaving main memory.

Virtual Bytes is the current size, in bytes, of the virtual address space the process is using. Use of virtual address space does not necessarily imply corresponding use of either disk or main memory pages. Virtual space is finite, and the process can limit its ability to load libraries.

Private Bytes is the current size, in bytes, of memory that this process has allocated that cannot be shared with other processes.

These are the questions I have:

Is it the Private Bytes which I should measure to be sure if the process is having any leaks as it does not involve any shared libraries and any leaks, if happening, will come from the process itself?

What is the total memory consumed by the process? Is it the Virtual Bytes or is it the sum of Virtual Bytes and Working Set?

Is there any relation between Private Bytes, Working Set and Virtual Bytes?

Are there any other tools that give a better idea of the memory usage?

回答1:

The short answer to this question is that none of these values are a reliable indicator of how much memory an executable is actually using, and none of them are really appropriate for debugging a memory leak.

Private Bytes refer to the amount of memory that the process executable has asked for - not necessarily the amount it is actually using. They are \"private\" because they (usually) exclude memory-mapped files (i.e. shared DLLs). But - here\'s the catch - they don\'t necessarily exclude memory allocated by those files. There is no way to tell whether a change in private bytes was due to the executable itself, or due to a linked library. Private bytes are also not exclusively physical memory; they can be paged to disk or in the standby page list (i.e. no longer in use, but not paged yet either).

Working Set refers to the total physical memory (RAM) used by the process. However, unlike private bytes, this also includes memory-mapped files and various other resources, so it\'s an even less accurate measurement than the private bytes. This is the same value that gets reported in Task Manager\'s \"Mem Usage\" and has been the source of endless amounts of confusion in recent years. Memory in the Working Set is \"physical\" in the sense that it can be addressed without a page fault; however, the standby page list is also still physically in memory but not reported in the Working Set, and this is why you might see the \"Mem Usage\" suddenly drop when you minimize an application.

Virtual Bytes are the total virtual address space occupied by the entire process. This is like the working set, in the sense that it includes memory-mapped files (shared DLLs), but it also includes data in the standby list and data that has already been paged out and is sitting in a pagefile on disk somewhere. The total virtual bytes used by every process on a system under heavy load will add up to significantly more memory than the machine actually has.

So the relationships are:

• Private Bytes are what your app has actually allocated, but include pagefile usage;
• Working Set is the non-paged Private Bytes plus memory-mapped files;
• Virtual Bytes are the Working Set plus paged Private Bytes and standby list.

There\'s another problem here; just as shared libraries can allocate memory inside your application module, leading to potential false positives reported in your app\'s Private Bytes, your application may also end up allocating memory inside the shared modules, leading to false negatives. That means it\'s actually possible for your application to have a memory leak that never manifests itself in the Private Bytes at all. Unlikely, but possible.

Private Bytes are a reasonable approximation of the amount of memory your executable is using and can be used to help narrow down a list of potential candidates for a memory leak; if you see the number growing and growing constantly and endlessly, you would want to check that process for a leak. This cannot, however, prove that there is or is not a leak.

One of the most effective tools for detecting/correcting memory leaks in Windows is actually Visual Studio (link goes to page on using VS for memory leaks, not the product page). Rational Purify is another possibility. Microsoft also has a more general best practices document on this subject. There are more tools listed in this previous question.

I hope this clears a few things up! Tracking down memory leaks is one of the most difficult things to do in debugging. Good luck.

回答2:

You should not try to use perfmon, task manager or any tool like that to determine memory leaks. They are good for identifying trends, but not much else. The numbers they report in absolute terms are too vague and aggregated to be useful for a specific task such as memory leak detection.

A previous reply to this question has given a great explanation of what the various types are.

You ask about a tool recommendation: I recommend Memory Validator. Capable of monitoring applications that make billions of memory allocations.

http://www.softwareverify.com/cpp/memory/index.html

Disclaimer: I designed Memory Validator.

回答3:

The definition of the perfmon counters has been broken since the beginning and for some reason appears to be too hard to correct.

A good overview of Windows memory management is available in the video \"Mysteries of Memory Management Revealed\" on MSDN: It covers more topics than needed to track memory leaks (eg working set management) but gives enough detail in the relevant topics.

---

To give you a hint of the problem with the perfmon counter descriptions, here is the inside story about private bytes from \"Private Bytes Performance Counter -- Beware!\" on MSDN:

Q: When is a Private Byte not a Private Byte?

A: When it isn\'t resident.

The Private Bytes counter reports the commit charge of the process. That is to say, the amount of space that has been allocated in the swap file to hold the contents of the private memory in the event that it is swapped out. Note: I\'m avoiding the word \"reserved\" because of possible confusion with virtual memory in the reserved state which is not committed.

---

From \"Performance Planning\" on MSDN:

3.3 Private Bytes

3.3.1 Description

Private memory, is defined as memory allocated for a process which cannot be shared by other processes. This memory is more expensive than shared memory when multiple such processes execute on a machine. Private memory in (traditional) unmanaged dlls usually constitutes of C++ statics and is of the order of 5% of the total working set of the dll.

回答4:

There is an interesting discussion here: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vcgeneral/thread/307d658a-f677-40f2-bdef-e6352b0bfe9e/ My understanding of this thread is that freeing small allocations are not reflected in Private Bytes or Working Set.

Long story short:

if I call

p=malloc(1000);
free(p);

then the Private Bytes reflect only the allocation, not the deallocation.

if I call

p=malloc(>512k);
free(p);

then the Private Bytes correctly reflect the allocation and the deallocation.