Home/ Questions/Q 6725669
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-26T09:50:07+00:00

I am following up from this question here The problem I have is that

  • 0

I am following up from this question here

The problem I have is that I have some large objects coming from an MSMQ mainly Strings. I have narrowed down my memory problems to these objects being created in the Large Object Heap (LOH) and therefore fragmenting it (confirmed that with some help from the profiler).

In the question I posted above I got some workarounds mainly in the form of splitting up the String into char arrays which I did.

The problem I am facing is that at the end of the string processing (in whatever form that is) I need to send that string to another system which I have no control over. So I was thinking of the following solution to have this String placed in the LOH:

  1. Represent it as an array of char arrays less than 85k each (threshold of Objects to be placed in the LOH)
  2. Compress it on the sender end (i.e. before receiving it in the system we are talking about here which is the receiver) and decompress it only before passing it in the third party system.

Whatever I do – one way or another – the String will have to be complete (no char arrays or compressed).

Am I stuck here? I am thinking if using a managed environment was a mistake here and whether we should bite the bullet and go for a C++ kind of environment.

Thanks,
Yannis

EDIT: I have narrowed down the problem to exactly the code posted here

The large string that comes through is placed in the LOH. I have removed every single processing module from point where i have received the message onwards and the memory consumption trend remains the same.

So I guess i need to change the way this WorkContext is passed around between systems.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    You maybe could implement a class (call it LargeString), that reuses previously assigned strings and keeps a small collection of them.

    Since strings normally are immutable, you’d have to do every change and new assignment by unsafe pointer juggling. After passing a string to the reciever, you’d need to manually mark it as free for reuse. Different message lengths might also be a problem, unless the reciever can cope with messages that are too long, or you have a collection of strings of every length.

    Probably not a great idea, but maybe beats rewriting everything in C++.

    • 0