Can I ask your motivation for using bokeh.client, push_session, etc? Apart from any bugs (of which I am sure there are) there are inherent and intrinsic limitations shortcomings of that approach that cannot be overcome, even in principle. For instance, there will always be double the network traffic overhead by definition since there is a third process involved.
We've tried to steer everyone towards the "bokeh serve app.py" as the most robust, scalable, simpler, and recommended method of doing things, but perhaps we can make this guidance even more vocal. There were a few particular use-cases where using bokeh.client was required (e.g. per-session customization), but we are working to mitigate these as well (e.g. in 0.12.2 "bokeh serve app.py" can be customized with HTML request arguments).
On Sep 6, 2016, at 2:06 AM, [email protected] wrote:
I'm running the streaming example "Connecting with bokeh.client" in the server guide, and it looks to be leaking memory pretty badly, around 500k per second. Has anyone else seen this kind of behavior? I didn't see any issues logged, or anything on the web that indicated this of problem with the current version.
This is on Bokeh 0.12.1, Python 2.7.12, OS X 10.11.6
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bokeh Discussion - Public" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/continuum.io/d/msgid/bokeh/2d7c584c-a9c9-4c6c-9f0b-6833fc9fbe39%40continuum.io.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/a/continuum.io/d/optout.