OutOfMemoryException with SQL Server Mobile

Hi,

I'm getting always an OutOfMemoryException after my program runs for a while. It's a smartphone application running on .NET 2.0 CF and using the SQL Server Mobile 2005. Sometimes it's even not a OutOfMemoryException but a SqlCeException. But it's always when the phone is having little free memory left.

I have also created a few custom controls (I even implemented the Disposable interface) to dispose all resources (Fonts, Bitmaps). I'm using all Pens and Brushes always in "using" blocks, to have them disposed immediately after having used them. The program does not have any static objects or lists of objects that are hold in memory for a long time.

I really don't understand why I get this exception. I see it always happen after doing a lot queries on the SQL Server Mobile. Is this tool using a lot memory? Can I flush somehow the memory of the SQL Server? Should I run also manually sometimes the GarbageCollector? Does this thing not run automatically?

Can anybody, perhaps of MSFT help me? I'm also willing to share the full source code with MSFT, if required.

You will probably get a faster answer on the Sql Server Mobile forum.

Moving this thread to that forum.

|||

Here are a few suggestions (from an earlier thread)

1) Try to use SqlCeResultSet than DataSet

2) Please dispose the managed objects explicitly instead of waiting for garbage collector to pick them up. Please also note that SqlCeCommand object can be reused and they need to be disposed explicitly

In addtion you can email me your project and I'll be glad to look into this issue for you.

Mark dot Ihimoyan at microsoft dot com

Out of Partition Deletions

Hi,

I have merge replication working between SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2005 Mobile Edition. The subscriber data partitions are determined by device serial number, which is being passed in as the HOST_NAME() parameter for filtering. Lately I've received complaints of slow synchronizations, and a quick inspection showed an unexpectedly high number of deletions.

Further investigation has revealed that subscribers are being passed deletions for data which is outside of their data partitions. I found that inserts and updates were well behaved - if a row was inserted or updated outside of the partition, nothing was replicated. However, if an out of partition deletion was performed, it was in fact replicated - to every subscriber.

So, why is it that replication knows the row doesn't belong to a data partition for inserts and updates, but not deletes? I've been unable to find either an explanation or workaround for this problem.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Adrien.

If i had to give a rough guess i think what it is doing is realigning the partitions. Your deletes must be deleting records from the filtering hiherarchy which change a partition. So those are being sent everywhere to make sure the subscribers have the correct partition of data.

Take a look at parameter @.allow_partition_realignment

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms176103.aspx

Unfortunately if you are using dynamic filtering it will not allow you to turn this off.

Martin

|||That's an interesting setting, but it doesn't seem to apply. I'll explain things with an example:

Users
user_id
warehouse_id
user_name
serial_number

Warehouses
warehouse_id
warehouse_name

Orders
order_id
warehouse_id
order_date

OrderDetail
detail_id
order_id
item_name
item_quantity

serial_number is being passed for HOST_NAME() dynamic filtering. A user should only see orders belonging to his assigned warehouse (and obviously only order details linked to orders belonging to that warehouse). For the purpose of this example, say we have two users, User1 and User2, and two warehouses, Warehouse1 and Warehouse2. Each warehouse has only one order, and each order has two order details.

The problem I'm having is that deleting (at the publisher) an order detail for an order belonging to Warehouse2 would cause a deletion not just for User2, but for User1 as well. I don't see how this is causing partition changes (unless moving from a partition to no partition counts as a partition change).

Hopefully this helps clarify my problem somewhat. This is still causing me no end of problems, and any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Adrien.

Out of Partition Deletions

Hi,

I have merge replication working between SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2005 Mobile Edition. The subscriber data partitions are determined by device serial number, which is being passed in as the HOST_NAME() parameter for filtering. Lately I've received complaints of slow synchronizations, and a quick inspection showed an unexpectedly high number of deletions.

Further investigation has revealed that subscribers are being passed deletions for data which is outside of their data partitions. I found that inserts and updates were well behaved - if a row was inserted or updated outside of the partition, nothing was replicated. However, if an out of partition deletion was performed, it was in fact replicated - to every subscriber.

So, why is it that replication knows the row doesn't belong to a data partition for inserts and updates, but not deletes? I've been unable to find either an explanation or workaround for this problem.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Adrien.

If i had to give a rough guess i think what it is doing is realigning the partitions. Your deletes must be deleting records from the filtering hiherarchy which change a partition. So those are being sent everywhere to make sure the subscribers have the correct partition of data.

Take a look at parameter @.allow_partition_realignment

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms176103.aspx

Unfortunately if you are using dynamic filtering it will not allow you to turn this off.

Martin

|||That's an interesting setting, but it doesn't seem to apply. I'll explain things with an example:

Users
user_id
warehouse_id
user_name
serial_number

Warehouses
warehouse_id
warehouse_name

Orders
order_id
warehouse_id
order_date

OrderDetail
detail_id
order_id
item_name
item_quantity

serial_number is being passed for HOST_NAME() dynamic filtering. A user should only see orders belonging to his assigned warehouse (and obviously only order details linked to orders belonging to that warehouse). For the purpose of this example, say we have two users, User1 and User2, and two warehouses, Warehouse1 and Warehouse2. Each warehouse has only one order, and each order has two order details.

The problem I'm having is that deleting (at the publisher) an order detail for an order belonging to Warehouse2 would cause a deletion not just for User2, but for User1 as well. I don't see how this is causing partition changes (unless moving from a partition to no partition counts as a partition change).

Hopefully this helps clarify my problem somewhat. This is still causing me no end of problems, and any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Adrien.

Out of Partition Deletions

Hi,

I have merge replication working between SQL Server 2005 and SQL Server 2005 Mobile Edition. The subscriber data partitions are determined by device serial number, which is being passed in as the HOST_NAME() parameter for filtering. Lately I've received complaints of slow synchronizations, and a quick inspection showed an unexpectedly high number of deletions.

Further investigation has revealed that subscribers are being passed deletions for data which is outside of their data partitions. I found that inserts and updates were well behaved - if a row was inserted or updated outside of the partition, nothing was replicated. However, if an out of partition deletion was performed, it was in fact replicated - to every subscriber.

So, why is it that replication knows the row doesn't belong to a data partition for inserts and updates, but not deletes? I've been unable to find either an explanation or workaround for this problem.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Adrien.

If i had to give a rough guess i think what it is doing is realigning the partitions. Your deletes must be deleting records from the filtering hiherarchy which change a partition. So those are being sent everywhere to make sure the subscribers have the correct partition of data.

Take a look at parameter @.allow_partition_realignment

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms176103.aspx

Unfortunately if you are using dynamic filtering it will not allow you to turn this off.

Martin

|||That's an interesting setting, but it doesn't seem to apply. I'll explain things with an example:

Users
user_id
warehouse_id
user_name
serial_number

Warehouses
warehouse_id
warehouse_name

Orders
order_id
warehouse_id
order_date

OrderDetail
detail_id
order_id
item_name
item_quantity

serial_number is being passed for HOST_NAME() dynamic filtering. A user should only see orders belonging to his assigned warehouse (and obviously only order details linked to orders belonging to that warehouse). For the purpose of this example, say we have two users, User1 and User2, and two warehouses, Warehouse1 and Warehouse2. Each warehouse has only one order, and each order has two order details.

The problem I'm having is that deleting (at the publisher) an order detail for an order belonging to Warehouse2 would cause a deletion not just for User2, but for User1 as well. I don't see how this is causing partition changes (unless moving from a partition to no partition counts as a partition change).

Hopefully this helps clarify my problem somewhat. This is still causing me no end of problems, and any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Adrien.