LIstView Memory Leak?

[David Miller]

Hello,

I posted this to DotNet.Framework.Controls a week ago or so and got no
response, so now I will repost it here to see if anyone here knows anything
about it...

I have an application that displays items in a ListView control that is
running on a Windows 98 SE machine. The machine is well within system
specifications for the .Net Framework. It is a 600 MHz with 128 MB of RAM,
and also has the Resource Meter application installed. The application is
written in VB.Net against the 1.1 version of the framework.

I wrote a simple test app in which the ListView is put into "Detail" view
mode, and populated with 100 rows and 15 columns of data. If the user grabs
the "bar" handle in the middle of the scrollbar on the ListView and
repeatedly drags it up and down, the system resource go down until they drop
below 10%. At that time I receive an error message that states the
following...

Ninety percent or more of your system resources are in use. To free up
system resources, quit any programs that you are not using. If you do
not, your computer may stop responding.

It doesn't seem to be a 98-specific problem, as you can see the memory go
down on my XP machine whenever I do the same test. It is just much more
apparant on the 98 machine because it only has 128 MB of RAM.

Has anyone encountered this problem before? Any help or info would be much
appreciated.

Thank you,
David Miller

[Dino Chiesa [MSFT]]

I don't know anything about a leak in the ListView.
Can you reproduce the symptom in a simple test case?

I just tried this, ran a listview demo on a WinXP machine with 128mb, and
saw no memory leak or memory growth. CPU usage goes up if I scroll rapidly,
but it returns to zero when I stop. and memory usage stays flat.

Are you possibly creating objects as you scroll?

I can send you my test case...
"David Miller" <dm*****@criticaltech.com> wrote in message
news:Oe*************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

Hello,

I posted this to DotNet.Framework.Controls a week ago or so and got no
response, so now I will repost it here to see if anyone here knows anything about it...

I have an application that displays items in a ListView control that is
running on a Windows 98 SE machine. The machine is well within system
specifications for the .Net Framework. It is a 600 MHz with 128 MB of RAM,
and also has the Resource Meter application installed. The application is
written in VB.Net against the 1.1 version of the framework.

I wrote a simple test app in which the ListView is put into "Detail" view
mode, and populated with 100 rows and 15 columns of data. If the user grabs the "bar" handle in the middle of the scrollbar on the ListView and
repeatedly drags it up and down, the system resource go down until they drop below 10%. At that time I receive an error message that states the
following...

Ninety percent or more of your system resources are in use. To free up
system resources, quit any programs that you are not using. If you do
not, your computer may stop responding.

It doesn't seem to be a 98-specific problem, as you can see the memory go
down on my XP machine whenever I do the same test. It is just much more
apparant on the 98 machine because it only has 128 MB of RAM.

Has anyone encountered this problem before? Any help or info would be much
appreciated.

Thank you,
David Miller

[David Miller]

Dino:

First of all, I would like to say thank you for your previous reply.

I not creating any objects as I scroll in my application.

I have attached a simple test app written in VS.Net 2003 that reproduces the
problem. Here is a list of steps that I am following on a Windows 98 SE
machine with 128 MB of RAM...

0. Install resource monitor off of the Win98 CD
1. Open resource monitor.
2. Run the test app.
3. Click on the "Search" button
4. Click and hold down the left mouse button on the scrollbar handle.
5. Rapidly drag the scrollbar handle between its top and bottom limits
repeatedly.

After about 5 to 10 seconds you should get a message from Windows 98 that
says you have less than 10 percent of your system resources left.

-David Miller

"Dino Chiesa [MSFT]" <di****@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:uz**************@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

I don't know anything about a leak in the ListView.
Can you reproduce the symptom in a simple test case?

I just tried this, ran a listview demo on a WinXP machine with 128mb, and
saw no memory leak or memory growth. CPU usage goes up if I scroll rapidly, but it returns to zero when I stop. and memory usage stays flat.

Are you possibly creating objects as you scroll?

I can send you my test case...
"David Miller" <dm*****@criticaltech.com> wrote in message
news:Oe*************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

Hello,

I posted this to DotNet.Framework.Controls a week ago or so and got no
response, so now I will repost it here to see if anyone here knows

anything

about it...

I have an application that displays items in a ListView control that is
running on a Windows 98 SE machine. The machine is well within system
specifications for the .Net Framework. It is a 600 MHz with 128 MB of RAM, and also has the Resource Meter application installed. The application is written in VB.Net against the 1.1 version of the framework.

I wrote a simple test app in which the ListView is put into "Detail" view mode, and populated with 100 rows and 15 columns of data. If the user

grabs

the "bar" handle in the middle of the scrollbar on the ListView and
repeatedly drags it up and down, the system resource go down until they

drop

below 10%. At that time I receive an error message that states the
following...

Ninety percent or more of your system resources are in use. To free up system resources, quit any programs that you are not using. If you do
not, your computer may stop responding.

It doesn't seem to be a 98-specific problem, as you can see the memory go down on my XP machine whenever I do the same test. It is just much more
apparant on the 98 machine because it only has 128 MB of RAM.

Has anyone encountered this problem before? Any help or info would be much appreciated.

Thank you,
David Miller