High memory usage, leak? Options

[tedych]

Hi. Recently I switched from Winamp. No fancy interfaces for foobar2000, just made simple customizations through scratchbox.
I'm currently using foobar2000 on Win7 Ent x64 SP1, with 8 gigs of RAM (if that does matter).
I use only waveform seekbar component, and input decoders for AC3, MID, APE.
Version 1.1.7. The first version I officialy install as a main player here.
I experience an increasing memory usage over time, when listening to anything. After 3 days of uptime the memory footprint is way over 120Megs of RAM. I tend to often uptime my PC for over 6 months in a row. All programs run smoothly, and being with Winamp for over 15 years, it was just as stable, not overpassing 30-40MB after that period.
I was expecting Foobar2000 to be at least as stable and even less memory usage. After start it takes 28MB. After I play few songs, it raises to 32, and goes upwards after every played song. A playlist with ~500 tracks only.
And as I said, after 3 days it is already above 120MB. If the player is not playng anything, no memory raising occurs.
Anyone else experiencing this?

[tedych]

I'm sorry, I managed to track down the problem with the memory leak.
It was one of the components I use (the only one now) . What a luck... I just switched to Foobar2000 after 15 years with Winamp, and ran into a problem with pretty much the only component I liked to make my foobar somewhat prettier and usable.

This post has been edited by tedych: Jul 3 2011, 13:58

[db1989]

I'm sorry, I managed to track down the problem with the memory leak.
It was one of the components I use (the only one now)

To quote myself from a recent post:

Which was. . . ?
(. . .) as a general principle, it would be nice if users who found their answer might mention what it was, in case anyone else had read and wondered the same thing.

[Zao]

It was my waveform seekbar, 0.2.12.
There's a lovely leak there due to missing local cleanup on an access violation, which in the foobar2000 world is a non-fatal error.

That particular leak was fixed in the (not properly released) 0.2.13.1 in the component thread, and as far as I know, there's no major leaks in that version.

[db1989]

Thanks, Zao!