I'm trying to get my mind around one aspect of memory management in the iPhone SDK.
If I ran:
for (int x = 0; x < 10; x++) {
NSMutableArray *myArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
}
Am I creating 10 myArray objects in memory, or does each alloc overwrite the previous? If the latter, I presume I would only need one [myArray release] after the loop to clean up. If the former, I presume I need the release inside the For loop.
Thanks.
You get ten different allocations and you need to release them if you do not want memory leaks.
for (int x = 0; x < 10; x++) {
NSMutableArray *myArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
....
[myArray release];
}
If you don't release, the leaked object would actually 10, not 9 as per comment, since outside of the loop you don't have access to the loop local variable and the last allocated object would also be unreachable.
Actually, you have 10 objects with 10 leaks. Once you leave the loop, myArray is no longer in scope (and is therefore inaccessible), so there is no way to release the 10th allocation either.
You're creating 10 objects, 9 of which are leaked.
You should release after you use them in the end of the loop.
This also not only about iPhone SDK. It's basic Cocoa memory management. Also works on the Mac.
In that case you are creating 10 different Array objects each one with a retain count of 1, and no reference whatsoever. This would be a "memory leak factory" with the 10 objects never beign released from the memory. :)
oooops... did not see the release...9 leaked arrays.
In addition to what everyone (rightly) said, Cocoa also supports autoreleased objects. If you rephrase your snippet thus:
for (int x = 0; x < 10; x++)
{
NSMutableArray *myArray = [NSMutableArray arrayWithObjects: ...];
//....
}
you still allocate 10 different arrays, but none are leaked. They are autoreleased eventually.
for (int x = 0; x < 10; x++) {
NSMutableArray *myArray = [NSMutableArray array]; //Its an autorelease
....
}
This creates 10 different NSMutableArray objects. You actually do not need to release them explictly.myArray is autoreleased at the end of the run loop.
You take ownership of an object if you create it using a method whose name begins with “alloc” or “new” or contains “copy” (for example, alloc, newObject, or mutableCopy), or if you send it a retain message. You are responsible for relinquishing ownership of objects you own using release or autorelease. Any other time you receive an object, you must not release it.
In NSMutableArray *myArray = [NSMutableArray array];, you do not take ownership of the array, and it will be passed to you autoreleased.
You can learn more about memory management here.
Related
I decided I need to go back over some basics recently, mostly to do with memory management and I'm beginning to doubt.
The reason I ask is because I'm a bit muddled with how to memory safe process items in array using temporary variables.
Could somebody wise in the ways of arc please tell me if this simple code will leak memory?
self.array=[NSMutableArray new];
// Retain +1
Test *obj0 = [[Test alloc] init];
// Retain +1
[self.array addObject:obj0];
Test *obj1 = nil;
//Retain +1
obj1=self.array[0];// does need to be __weak even though it has no owner?
[self.array removeAllObjects];
// is not null
NSLog(#"A: %#", obj1);
When you add obj0 to the array, its retain count will be incremented, see e.g. here. It is then +2.
When you assign it to obj1, it still has an retain count of +2.
When you remove all objects from the array, their retain count will be decremented, so obj0 has again anretain count of +1.
It thus won't leak.
I have started out with Objective-C recently and trying to understand the memory management. I came across a peculiar problem yesterday which was causing a memory leak of over 150MB! I traced it down to a piece of code that was creating NSArray literal of NSNumbers. I managed to solve the issue using NSMutableArray (using addObject), but I haven't been able to grasp the concept as to why one method works and the other doesn't. I would love for someone with a better understanding of the memory management to explain the concept behind it so that I can avoid such mistakes in the future.
To better illustrate my question, let me also provide the code snippets. So for instance, I have a function that creates a NSArray of few NSNumbers and returns it and it gets called many times:
-(NSArray *)getNSNumberArray
{
float num1 = 23.56;
float num2 = 75.34;
float num3 = 223.56;
NSArray *numArray = #[[NSNumber numberWithFloat:num1], [NSNumber numberWithFloat:num2], [NSNumber numberWithFloat:num3]];
return numArray;
}
-(void)causeMemoryLeak
{
for (int i = 0; i < 2000000; i++)
{
NSArray *recieverArray = [self getNSNumberArray];
}
}
This results in memory being occupied to be more than 200MB on an iphone6. However if I change my function to be:
-(NSArray *)getNSNumberArray
{
float num1 = 23.56;
float num2 = 75.34;
float num3 = 223.56;
NSMutableArray *numMutableArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
NSNumber *nsNumber1 = [NSNumber numberWithFloat:num1];
NSNumber *nsNumber2 = [NSNumber numberWithFloat:num2];
NSNumber *nsNumber3 = [NSNumber numberWithFloat:num3];
[numMutableArray addObject:nsNumber1];
[numMutableArray addObject:nsNumber2];
[numMutableArray addObject:nsNumber3];
return numMutableArray;
}
-(void)causeMemoryLeak
{
for (int i = 0; i < 2000000; i++)
{
NSArray *recieverArray = [self getNSNumberArray];
}
}
This does not cause any memory issues.
Maybe I am missing something very obvious, but still cant figure out the reason behind this. Would really appreciate the help on this. There could also be better ways of doing it, and such answers are welcome but basically I am looking for an explanation behind it.
Many thanks in advance!
Attaching links to screenshots showing the memory allocation on device (iphone 6) (I can not attach images here as of now, so have to provide links)
Approach 1 Memory Allocation (memory is retained and not freed up): https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-a9WJSBuIL4bTR5RTVuaWpqYkE&authuser=0
Approach 2 Memory Allocation (memory is freed up and there is no surge in memory allocation as well): https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-a9WJSBuIL4QzQzbGYyQzZDdW8&authuser=0
I tried your code because I really didn't found any reason for memory leak and there is no memory leak.
When you use the regular array, the device runs all the code, and releases the memory only at the end. This causing the heap to alloc 250 MB, and release them at the end.
If you use the mutable array, the device releases the previous array before creating the new one, so there is no point with to many allocation.
I guess that the different may be caused by run time complexity of the called function in the loop.
As you are saying, only one approach is causing surge in memory, it does not seem so. According to the documentation, NSMutableArray uses slightly more memory because it can change size, it can't store the contents inside the object and must store a pointer to out of line storage as well as the extra malloc node for the storage.
In both the approaches, memory is freed up instantly, there is no issue with me.
Update 1 :
I have noticed that if you use the array, for example if you log the array, the memory is freed up instantly in your first approach. It is happening as you do not use that array. It solves your problem.Try this code :
-(NSArray *)getNSNumberArray
{
float num1 = 23.56;
float num2 = 75.34;
float num3 = 223.56;
NSArray *numArray = #[[NSNumber numberWithFloat:num1], [NSNumber numberWithFloat:num2], [NSNumber numberWithFloat:num3]];
return numArray;
}
-(void)causeMemoryLeak
{
for (int i = 0; i < 2000000; i++)
{
NSArray *recieverArray = [self getNSNumberArray];
NSLog(#"%#", recieverArray);
}
}
First, you need to read up on "autorelease" and "autorelease pools". Objects often are kept inside an autorelease pool and only disappear when the autorelease pool disappears. So a loop iterating two million times without using an autorelease pool is a bad, bad idea. You don't actually have a memory leak, the objects will all be released some time after the method returns.
Most methods returning objects return autoreleased objects, but the result of [[xxx alloc] init] is not autoreleased, so there you have the difference. But also ARC is quite clever, and if a method returns an autoreleased object and the caller immediately retains the object, the object will not actually be added to the autorelease pool. That's what happened when the object was passed to NSLog; in order to do that, it had to be retained first. No autorelease pool. In your code, the object was never used, so that optimisation didn't happened.
Of course your code is really useless, so you were punished for writing useless code.
Here is code I am referring to.
// Person.h
#interface Person : NSObject {
NSString *firstName;
NSString *lastName;
}
#end
// Person.m
#implementation Person
- (id)init {
if (![super init]) return nil;
firstName = #"John";
lastName = #"Doe";
}
#end
// MyClass.m
#implementation MyClass
.....
- (NSArray *)getPeople {
NSMutableArray *array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init];
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
Person *p = [[Person alloc] init];
[array addObject:p];
}
return array;
}
.....
#end
Now, I know there is no memory-management going on in this sample code. What would be required?
In the getPeople loop, I am alloc'ing a Person (retainCount 1), then adding it to array. The retain count is now 2, right? If it is two, should I be [p release]'ing after adding it to the array, bringing the retainCount back down to 1?
Am I right in that it is the caller's responsibility to release the array returned by the method? (Which would also free the memory of the Person's, and their instance variables, assuming their counts are at 1).
I have read Apple's memory management document, but I guess what I am most unclear about, is what increases an objects retain count? I think I grasp the idea of who's responsibility it is to release, though. This is the fundamental rule, according to Apple:
You take ownership of an object if you create it using a method whose name begins with “alloc” or “new” or contains “copy” (for example, alloc, newObject, or mutableCopy), or if you send it a retain message. You are responsible for relinquishing ownership of objects you own using release or autorelease. Any other time you receive an object, you must not release it.
bobDevil's sentence "only worry about the retain counts you add to the item explicitly" made it click for me. After reading the Ownership policy at Apple, essentially, the object/method that created the new object, is the one responsible for releasing /it's/ interest in it. Is this correct?
Now, let's say I a method, that receives an object, and assigns it to a instance variable. I need to retain the received object correct, as I still have an interest in it?
If any of this is incorrect, let me know.
You are correct that the retain count is 2 after adding it to an array. However, you should only worry about the retain counts you add to the item explicitly.
Retaining an object is a contract that says "I'm not done with you, don't go away." A basic rule of thumb (there are exceptions, but they are usually documented) is that you own the object when you alloc an object, or create a copy. This means you're given the object with a retain count of 1(not autoreleased). In those two cases, you should release it when you are done. Additionally, if you ever explicitly retain an object, you must release it.
So, to be specific to your example, when you create the Person, you have one retain count on it. You add it to an array (which does whatever with it, you don't care) and then you're done with the Person, so you release it:
Person *p = [[Person alloc] init]; //retain 1, for you
[array addObject:p]; //array deals with p however it wants
[p release]; //you're done, so release it
Also, as I said above, you only own the object during alloc or copy generally, so to be consistent with that on the other side of things, you should return the array autoreleased, so that the caller of the getPeople method does not own it.
return [array autorelease];
Edit:
Correct, if you create it, you must release it. If you invest interest in it (through retain) you must release it.
Retain counts are increased when you call alloc specifically, so you'll need to release that explicitly.
factory methods usually give you an autoreleased object (such as [NSMutableArray array] -- you would have to specifically retain this to keep it around for any length of time.).
As far as NSArray and NSMutableArray addObject:, someone else will have to comment. I believe that you treat a classes as black boxes in terms of how they handle their own memory management as a design pattern, so you would never explicitly release something that you have passed into NSArray. When it gets destroyed, its supposed to handle decrementing the retain count itself.
You can also get a somewhat implicit retain if you declare your ivars as properties like #property (retain) suchAndSuchIvar, and use #synthesize in your implementation. Synthesize basically creates setters and getters for you, and if you call out (retain) specifically, the setter is going to retain the object passed in to it. Its not always immediately obvious, because the setters can be structured like this:
Person fart = [[Person alloc] init];
fart.firstName = #"Josh"; // this is actually a setter, not accessing the ivar
// equivalent to [fart setFirstName: #"Josh"], such that
// retainCount++
Edit:
And as far as the memory management, as soon as you add the object to the array, you're done with it... so:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
Person *p = [[Person alloc] init];
[array addObject:p];
[p release];
}
Josh
You should generally /not/ be worried about the retain count. That's internally implemented. You should only care about whether you want to "own" an object by retaining it. In the code above, the array should own the object, not you (outside of the loop you don't even have reference to it except through the array). Because you own [[Person alloc] init], you then have to release it.
Thus
Person *p = [[Person alloc] init];
[array addObject:p];
[p release];
Also, the caller of "getPeople" should not own the array. This is the convention. You should autorelease it first.
NSMutableArray *array = [[[NSMutableArray alloc] init] autorelease];
You'll want to read Apple's documentation on memory management: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/MemoryMgmt/MemoryMgmt.html
My original project was leaking so I searched for the leak. When I found it I created a simple new project.
The project uses ARC and the only code I added is the following.
- (void)applicationDidFinishLaunching:(NSNotification *)aNotification
{
int elements = 10000000;
//memory usage 5,2 MB
NSMutableArray *array = [NSMutableArray arrayWithCapacity:elements];
//memory usage 81,7 MB
for (int i = 0; i < elements; i++) {
[array addObject:[NSObject new]];
}
//memory usage 234,3 MB
[array removeAllObjects];
//memory usage 234,3 MB
array = nil;
//memory usage 159,5 MB
}
After calling [array removeAllObjects] all NSObjects in the array should be deallocated and the memory usage should be 81,7 MB again.
What am I doing wrong?
Here
NSMutableArray *array = [NSMutableArray arrayWithCapacity:elements];
you are creating autoreleased object (autorelease pool).
Many programs create temporary objects that are autoreleased. These
objects add to the program’s memory footprint until the end of the
block. In many situations, allowing temporary objects to accumulate
until the end of the current event-loop iteration does not result in
excessive overhead; in some situations, however, you may create a
large number of temporary objects that add substantially to memory
footprint and that you want to dispose of more quickly. In these
latter cases, you can create your own autorelease pool block. At the
end of the block, the temporary objects are released, which typically
results in their deallocation thereby reducing the program’s memory
footprint
Wrap with #autoreleasepool {} method [NSMutableArray arrayWithCapacity:elements]:
NSMutableArray *array;
#autoreleasepool {
array = [NSMutableArray arrayWithCapacity:elements];
// [NSMutableArray arrayWithCapacity:] creates object with retainCount == 1
// and pushes it to autorelease pool
// array = some_object; usually (and in this case also) is transformed by ARC to
// [array release]; [some_object retain]; array = some_object;
// so here array will have retainCount == 2 and 1 reference in autorelease pool
} // here autorelease pool will call `release` for its objects.
// here array will have retainCount == 1
or change it to
NSMutableArray *array = [[NSMutableArray alloc] initWithCapacity:elements];
You've been bitten by the dreaded autorelease pool. Essentially to make MRC (manual reference counting) manageable by people instead of releasing an object immediately it can be handed to the autorelease pool (an instance of NSAutoreleasePool, it's documentation gives more details) which will retain the object until the pool is later drained. ARC (automatic reference counting) could be designed so the autorelease machinery is not needed, but to maintain compatibility with MRC is remains.
The pool automatically drained at the end of a run loop cycle - i.e. when the application has finished processing an event. However if an application creates a lot of temporary objects and then discards them is some localised part of the program then a using a local autorelease pool can drastically reduce the maximum memory use. It is not that such temporary objects will not be release, just that they will live far longer than needed. A local pool can be create with the #autoreleasepool { ... } construct.
You can see the effect in your example by wrapping the whole of the body of applicationDidFinishLaunching:
- (void)applicationDidFinishLaunching:(NSNotification *)aNotification
{
#autoreleasepool
{
...
}
}
and stepping through with the debugger.
In your real code you need to work back from the point which is producing lots of temporary objects to locate a suitable point to add an autorelease pool.
HTH.
Addendum
It is not the objects in your array that are not getting released when you think they should , you can test this by using a simple class which counts initialisations and deallocations, e.g.:
#interface TestObject : NSObject
+ (void) showCounts;
#end
#implementation TestObject
static uint64_t initCount = 0, deallocCount = 0;
- (id) init
{
self = [super init];
if(self) initCount++;
return self;
}
- (void) dealloc
{
deallocCount++;
}
+ (void) showCounts
{
NSLog(#"init: %llu | dealloc: %llu", initCount, deallocCount);
initCount = deallocCount = 0;
}
#end
Use this instead of NSObject and call showCounts after you are done with your test - try with/without autorelease, etc.
Your memory is always getting released, it is just the time at which it is release that is the issue. Some objects end up in an autorelease pool, either the default one which is emptied once per event, or a local one.
Unless you create a lot of temporary objects in response to a single event you normally won't see an issue. Consider whether you are chasing a real issue for your application here. If you are among the things to try to alleviate the problem are:
Avoid uses of convenience constructors of the form <name>WithX... which are shorthands for [[[C alloc] initWithX...] autorelease]. On many, but not all, occasions the compiler can remove such objects from the autorelease pool just after the convenience constructor returns (and your case appears to be one in which is can fail). The better route is to use alloc/init, new (shorthand for alloc/init) or, if provided, newWithX... (shorthand for alloc/initWithX...). Try these options with your example and see the differences in when (not if) the memory is released.
Well placed #autoreleasepool blocks.
HTH
I have a loop where I'd like to redefine the contents of an array with every iteration. I'm worried about leaks. Is there anything wrong with this code?
for (int i=0;i<numberOfReps;i++){
NSArray *shuffledArray=[self shuffleArray:originalArray];
// use shuffled array
}
Thanks for reading!
EDIT:
Here is shuffleArray (credit to Kristopher Johnson from What's the Best Way to Shuffle an NSMutableArray?):
-(NSArray*)shuffleArray:(NSArray*)array{
NSMutableArray *newArray=[NSMutableArray arrayWithArray:array];
NSUInteger count = [newArray count];
for (NSUInteger i = 0; i < count; ++i) {
// Select a random element between i and end of array to swap with.
int nElements = count - i;
int n = (arc4random() % nElements) + i;
[newArray exchangeObjectAtIndex:i withObjectAtIndex:n];
}
return [NSArray arrayWithArray:newArray];
}
(And I am using ARC.)
Assuming we're using ARC and the shuffleArray method is fine, this bit of code will be fine too. There's no leak in the code you've posted.
Each shuffledArray is deallocated at the end of each iteration of the loop (unless you're saving it somewhere else). And there is only one originalArray.
EDIT: After the edit, again, assuming we're using ARC, there's no leak with the code. newArray is released as soon as shuffleArray returns. shuffledArray is released at the end of the loop iteration. originalArray has reference outside the for loop, and remains in memory until it has no more references.
The only possible leak here would be whatever you do with shuffledArray in the //use shuffled array section of the loop.
That depends.
Only if you're sure that the method shuffleArray returns an autoreleased object then there's no harm with your code, (and this assuming you're not using ARC).
EDIT:
After seeing your code update, regardless if you're using ARC, there's no leak