REDUCING MEMORY USAGE IN UNITY, C# AND .NET/MONO

转自 https://andrewfray.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/reducing-memory-usage-in-unity-c-and-netmono/

Unity on iOS uses an early version of Mono’s heap manager. This manager doesn’t do packing, so if you fragment your heap, it’ll just grab a new one for you. I am under the impression the Unity boffins are working on a new heap manager to get around this problem, but for now a game with no memory leaks can end up consuming ever-increasing amounts of memory. C# is a fun language that allows you to quickly write powerful code without sacrificing readability. However the downside to this is that writing natural C# code produces a lot of garbage collection. The only way around this is to eliminate or reduce your heap allocations. I’ve compiled a handy list ways to do this without reducing functionality. The end effect is that your C# code looks much more like C++, and so you lose some of that C# power, but such is life. As an added bonus, heap allocs are inherently more CPU-intensive than stack allocs, so you’ll probably save some frame time as well. To target your efforts, the Unity profiler can help you functions that make a lot of allocations. It’s not a lot of info, but it’s there. Open the profiler and run the game,  select the CPU profiler, and tap the GC Alloc column to sort by the worst offenders. Apply these guidelines to those functions first.

• Avoid using foreach(). It calls GetEnumerator() on your list type, which will allocate an enumerator on the heap just to throw it away. You’ll have to use the more verbose C++-style for(;;) syntax. EDIT: Unless you’re foreach-ing over an array. That causes no allocations. I guess that’s a special case that becomes syntactic sugar for a for(…){}? Thanks to Ian Horswill for pointing that out.

• Avoid strings. Strings are immutable in .NET and allocated on the heap. You can’t manipulate them in-place like C. For UI, use StringBuilders to build up strings in a memory-efficient manner, delaying the conversion to string until as late as possible. You can use them as keys because literals should point to the same instance in memory, but don’t manipulate them too much.

• Use structs. Struct types in mono are allocated on the stack, so if you have a utility class that won’t leave scope, make it a struct. Remember structs are passed by value, so you will have to prefix a parameter with ref to avoid any copy costs.

• Replace scope-bound fixed-size arrays with structs. If you have a fixed-size array that doesn’t leave scope, consider either replacing it with a member array that you can reuse, or create a struct with fields that mirror it. I replaced a Vector3[4] that was allocated every time you called our spline class with a ControlList struct that had four fields. I then added an this[] property for index-based access. This saved a ton of allocations because it was such a high-frequency function.

• Favour populating lists passed as ref parameters over returning new lists. This sounds like you’re not saving anything – you still need to heap-alloc the list you pass in, right? – but it allows us to, where necessary, make the next particularly ugly optimisation:

• Consider storing the scope-local storage of a high-frequency function as a member variable. If your function needs a big list every time it’s called, make that list a member variable so the storage persists between frames. Calling .Clear() on a C# list won’t delete the buffer space so you have no/less allocs to do next frame. It’s ugly and makes the code less readable so needs a good comment, but can make a big difference on heavy lifters.

• Avoid IEnumerable extension methods. It goes without saying that most Linq IEnumerable extension methods, as handy as they are, will create new allocations. However I was surprised that .Any(), called on an IList<>, which I expected to just be a virtual function to Count > 0, triggered an allocation. It’s the same for other funcs that should be trivial on an IList, like First() and Last(). If anyone can illuminate me on why this is I’d appreciate it. Because of this, and the foreach() restriction, I’d go as far as to say avoid the IEnumerable<> abstraction in your interfaces, and use IList<> instead.

• Minimise use of function pointers. Putting a class method in a delegate or a Func<> causes it to be boxed, which triggers an allocation. I can’t find any way to store a link to a method without boxing. I’ve left most of my function pointers in there because they’re a massive boon to decoupling, and I’ll just have to live with the allocs, but I’ve removed some.

• Beware cloned materials. If you get the material property of any renderer, the material will be cloned even if you don’t set anything on it. This material isn’t GC’d, and is only cleared up when you either change levels or call Resources.UnloadUnusedAssets(). Use myRenderer.sharedMaterial if you know you don’t want to adjust the material.

• Don’t use raw structs as keys in dictionaries unless... If you use a Dictionary<K,V> type, and your key value is a struct, fetching a value from the dictionary using TryGetValue() or the index accessor can, somehow, cause an allocation. To avoid this, implement IEquatable<K> for your struct. I guess the dictionary is creating some default equality comparer every time. Thanks to Ryan Williams for finding this one.

• 2014/5/8 Don’t overuse Enum.GetValues() or myEnumValue.ToString(). Enum.GetValues(typeof(MyEnum)) allocates an array with every call. Enum.GetNames() does something similar. If you’re like me, you’re probably using these heavily, along with .ToString() on enum variables, to do UI, as well as is other places. You can cache both these arrays easily, allowing you to do a for loop over enum values as well as cachedEnumNames[(int)myEnumValue]. This doesn’t work if your enum values are manually set, eg flags.