성능과 튜닝 [JavaScript Tutorials] More leakage patterns (해석중)

황제낙엽 2009.04.10 03:05 조회 수 : 578 추천:101

sitelink1  
sitelink2  
sitelink3  
sitelink4 http://1 
extra_vars4 ko 
extra_vars5 http://www.javascriptkit.com/javatutors/closuresleak/index3.shtml 
extra_vars6 sitelink1 

All of the patterns shown below are described in detail in Justing's article. I'm going through them just for the sake of completeness:

[Exhibit 5 - Circular reference because of expando property]
·미리보기 | 소스복사·
  1. <html>   
  2. <head>   
  3. <script type="text/javascript">   
  4.     var myGlobalObject;   
  5.   
  6.     function SetupLeak(){   
  7.         //Here a reference created from the JS World    
  8.         //to the DOM world.   
  9.         myGlobalObject=document.getElementById("LeakedDiv");   
  10.   
  11.         //Here DOM refers back to JS World;    
  12.         //hence a circular reference.   
  13.         //The memory will leak if not handled properly.   
  14.         document.getElementById("LeakedDiv").expandoProperty=   
  15.                                                myGlobalObject;   
  16.     }   
  17. </script>   
  18. </head>   
  19. <body onload="SetupLeak()">   
  20. <div id="LeakedDiv"></div>   
  21. </body>   
  22. </html>  

Here the global variable myGlobalObject refers to the DOM element LeakDiv; at the same time LeakDiv refers to the global object through its expandoProperty. The situation looks like this:

The above pattern will leak due to the circular reference created between a DOM node and a JS element.

Since the JScript garbage collector is a mark and sweep GC, you may think that it would handle circular references. And in fact it does. However this circular reference is between the DOM and JS worlds. DOM and JS have separate garbage collectors. Therefore they cannot clean up memory in situations like the above.

Another way to create a circular reference is to encapsulate the DOM element as a property of a global object:

[Exhibit 6 - Circular reference using an Encapsulator pattern]
·미리보기 | 소스복사·
  1. <html>   
  2. <head>   
  3. <script type="text/javascript">   
  4. function Encapsulator(element){   
  5.     //Assign our memeber   
  6.     this.elementReference = element;   
  7.   
  8.     // Makea circular reference   
  9.     element.expandoProperty = this;   
  10. }   
  11.   
  12. function SetupLeak() {   
  13.     //This leaks   
  14.     new Encapsulator(document.getElementById("LeakedDiv"));   
  15. }   
  16. </script>   
  17. </head>   
  18. <body onload="SetupLeak()">   
  19. <div id="LeakedDiv"></div>   
  20. </body>   
  21. </html>  

Here is how it looks like:

However, the most common usage of closures over DOM nodes is event attachment. The following code will leak:

[Exhibit 7 - Adding an event listener as a closure function]
·미리보기 | 소스복사·
  1. <html>   
  2. <head>   
  3. <script type="text/javascript">   
  4. window.onload=function(){   
  5.     // obj will be gc'ed as soon as    
  6.     // it goes out of scope therefore no leak.   
  7.     var obj = document.getElementById("element");   
  8.        
  9.     // this creates a closure over "element"   
  10.     // and will leak if not handled properly.   
  11.     obj.onclick=function(evt){   
  12.         ... logic ...   
  13.     };   
  14. };   
  15. </script>   
  16. </head>   
  17. <body>   
  18. <div id="element"></div>   
  19. </body>   
  20. </html>  

Here is a diagram describing the closure which creates a circular reference between the DOM world and the JS world.

The above pattern will leak due to closure. Here the closure's global variable obj is referring to the DOM element. In the mean time, the DOM element holds a reference to the entire closure. This generates a circular reference between the DOM and the JS worlds. That is the cause of leakage.

When we remove closure we see that the leak has gone:

[Exhibit 8- Leak free event registration - No closures were harmed]
·미리보기 | 소스복사·
  1. <html>   
  2. <head>   
  3. <script type="text/javascript">   
  4. window.onload=function(){   
  5.     // obj will be gc'ed as soon as    
  6.     // it goes out of scope therefore no leak.   
  7.     var obj = document.getElementById("element");   
  8.     obj.onclick=element_click;   
  9. };   
  10.   
  11. //HTML DOM object "element" refers to this function   
  12. //externally   
  13. function element_click(evt){   
  14.     ... logic ...   
  15. }   
  16. </script>   
  17. </head>   
  18. <body>   
  19. <div id="element"></div>   
  20. </body>   
  21. </html>  

Here is the diagram for the above code piece:

This pattern will not leak because as soon as the function window.onload finishes execution, the JS object obj will be marked for garbage collection. So there won't be any reference to the DOM node on the JS side.

And the last but not the least leak pattern is the "cross-page leak":

[Exhibit 10 - Cross Page Leak]
·미리보기 | 소스복사·
  1. <html>   
  2. <head>   
  3. <script type="text/javascript">   
  4. function LeakMemory(){   
  5.     var hostElement = document.getElementById("hostElement");   
  6.     // Do it a lot, look at Task Manager for memory response   
  7.     for(i = 0; i < 5000; i++){   
  8.         var parentDiv =   
  9.         document.createElement("<div onClick='foo()'>");   
  10.   
  11.         var childDiv =   
  12.         document.createElement("<div onClick='foo()'>");   
  13.   
  14.         // This will leak a temporary object   
  15.         parentDiv.appendChild(childDiv);   
  16.         hostElement.appendChild(parentDiv);   
  17.         hostElement.removeChild(parentDiv);   
  18.         parentDiv.removeChild(childDiv);   
  19.         parentDiv = null;   
  20.         childDiv = null;   
  21.     }   
  22.     hostElement = null;   
  23. }   
  24. </script>   
  25. </head>   
  26. <body>   
  27. <input type="button"    
  28.        value="Memory Leaking Insert" onclick="LeakMemory()" />   
  29. <div id="hostElement"></div>   
  30. </body>   
  31. </html>  

Since we observe memory leakage even in Exhibit 1, it is not surprising that this pattern leaks. Here is what happens: When we append childDiv to parentDiv, a temporary scope from childDiv to parentDiv is created which will leak a temporary script object. Note that document.createElement("<div onClick='foo()'>"); is a non-standard method of event attachment.

Simply using the "best practices" is not enough (as Justing has mentioned in his article as well). One should also adhere to standards as much as possible. If not, he may not have a single clue about what went wrong with the code that was working perfectly a few hours ago (which had just crashed unexpectedly).

Anyway, let us re-order our insertion. The code below will not leak:

[Exhibit 11 - DOM insertion re-ordered - no leaks]
·미리보기 | 소스복사·
  1. <html>   
  2. <head>   
  3. <script type="text/javascript">   
  4. function LeakMemory(){   
  5.     var hostElement = document.getElementById("hostElement");   
  6.     // Do it a lot, look at Task Manager for memory response   
  7.     for(i = 0; i < 5000; i++){   
  8.         var parentDiv =   
  9.           document.createElement("<div onClick='foo()'>");   
  10.   
  11.         var childDiv =   
  12.           document.createElement("<div onClick='foo()'>");   
  13.   
  14.         hostElement.appendChild(parentDiv);   
  15.         parentDiv.appendChild(childDiv);   
  16.         parentDiv.removeChild(childDiv);   
  17.         hostElement.removeChild(parentDiv);   
  18.   
  19.         parentDiv = null;   
  20.         childDiv = null;   
  21.     }   
  22.     hostElement = null;   
  23. }   
  24. </script>   
  25. </head>   
  26. <body>   
  27. <input type="button"    
  28.        value="Memory Leaking Insert" onclick="LeakMemory()" />   
  29. <div id="hostElement"></div>   
  30. </body>   
  31. </html>  

We should keep in mind that, although it is the market leader, IE is not the only browser in the world. And writing IE-specific non-standard code is a bad practice of coding. The counter-argument is true as well. I mean, saying "Mozilla is the best browser so I write Mozilla-specific code; I don't care what the heck happens to the rest" is an equally bad attitude. You should enlarge your spectrum as much as possible. As a corollary, you should write standards-compatible code to the highest extent, whenever possible.

Writing, "backwards compatible" code is "out" nowadays. The "in" is writing "forward compatible" (also known as standards compatible) code which will run now and in the future, in current and in future browsers, here and on the moon.

이 게시물을
목록
번호 제목 글쓴이 날짜 조회 수
186 XMLHttpRequest.timeout 황제낙엽 2018.11.03 656
185 브라우저에서 뒤로 가기 막기와 펑션키(function key) 막기 황제낙엽 2005.10.21 654
184 두 서버의 자원을 접근하는 클라이언트 프레임웍(Next.js)에서의 CORS오류 file 황제낙엽 2021.12.05 651
183 javascript array contains method 황제낙엽 2011.08.19 649
182 (Bard) FileReader 로 여러개의 파일을 read 하는 법 file 황제낙엽 2023.08.23 645
181 Understanding User-Agent Strings 황제낙엽 2011.02.22 642
180 문자열에서 역슬래시(backslash) 문자와 유니코드(Unicode)에 대한 고찰 file 황제낙엽 2021.06.03 639
179 [JavaScript Tutorials] JavaScript and memory leaks (해석중) 황제낙엽 2009.04.08 635
178 브라우저의 스크롤을 따라다니는 레이어 두번째 file 황제낙엽 2002.12.20 635
177 CryptoJS 를 이용한 암호화 황제낙엽 2023.02.15 631
176 UTF-8 한글 초성 추출 (자바스크립트) 황제낙엽 2019.05.07 631
175 자바스크립트 학습용 유튜브 강의 (드림코딩 by 엘리) 황제낙엽 2021.03.07 630
174 Fetch API (CORS 극복을 위한 노력) 황제낙엽 2021.12.05 629
173 소스 보기 막기 황제낙엽 2005.11.18 627
172 CKEditor 3 JavaScript API Documentation 황제낙엽 2011.11.14 624
171 IE브라우저에서 서버의 XML파일을 ajax로 가져와 DOM파싱하는 예제 (XMLHttpRequest, XML, ActiveXObject) 황제낙엽 2018.11.23 622
170 Page Refresh/Reload 황제낙엽 2007.08.24 622
169 자바스크립트 내장 함수 활용하기 황제낙엽 2005.04.25 618
168 How to use Rhino to script Java classes. 황제낙엽 2008.07.14 612
167 Jasmine 테스트 및 CI 구축 가이드 황제낙엽 2016.11.16 611
쓰기 태그