Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Getting the size of a field in bytes with C#

You can't, basically. It will depend on padding, which may well be based on the CLR version you're using and the processor etc. It's easier to work out the total size of an object, assuming it has no references to other objects: create a big array, use GC.GetTotalMemory for a base point, fill the array with references to new instances of your type, and then call GetTotalMemory again. Take one value away from the other, and divide by the number of instances. You should probably create a single instance beforehand to make sure that no new JITted code contributes to the number. Yes, it's as hacky as it sounds - but I've used it to good effect before now.

Just yesterday I was thinking it would be a good idea to write a little helper class for this. Let me know if you'd be interested.

EDIT: There are two other suggestions, and I'd like to address them both.

Firstly, the sizeof operator: this only shows how much space the type takes up in the abstract, with no padding applied round it. (It includes padding within a structure, but not padding applied to a variable of that type within another type.)

Next, Marshal.SizeOf: this only shows the unmanaged size after marshalling, not the actual size in memory. As the documentation explicitly states:

The size returned is the actually the size of the unmanaged type. The unmanaged and managed sizes of an object can differ. For character types, the size is affected by the CharSet value applied to that class.

And again, padding can make a difference.

Just to clarify what I mean about padding being relevant, consider these two classes:

class FourBytes { byte a, b, c, d; }
class FiveBytes { byte a, b, c, d, e; }

On my x86 box, an instance of FourBytes takes 12 bytes (including overhead). An instance of FiveBytes takes 16 bytes. The only difference is the "e" variable - so does that take 4 bytes? Well, sort of... and sort of not. Fairly obviously, you could remove any single variable from FiveBytes to get the size back down to 12 bytes, but that doesn't mean that each of the variables takes up 4 bytes (think about removing all of them!). The cost of a single variable just isn't a concept which makes a lot of sense here.


Depending on the needs of the questionee, Marshal.SizeOf might or might not give you what you want. (Edited after Jon Skeet posted his answer).

using System;
using System.Runtime.InteropServices;

public class MyClass
{
    public static void Main()
    {
        Int32 a = 10;
        Console.WriteLine(Marshal.SizeOf(a));
        Console.ReadLine();
    }
}

Note that, as jkersch says, sizeof can be used, but unfortunately only with value types. If you need the size of a class, Marshal.SizeOf is the way to go.

Jon Skeet has laid out why neither sizeof nor Marshal.SizeOf is perfect. I guess the questionee needs to decide wether either is acceptable to his problem.


From Jon Skeets recipe in his answer I tried to make the helper class he was refering to. Suggestions for improvements are welcome.

public class MeasureSize<T>
{
    private readonly Func<T> _generator;
    private const int NumberOfInstances = 10000;
    private readonly T[] _memArray;

    public MeasureSize(Func<T> generator)
    {
        _generator = generator;
        _memArray = new T[NumberOfInstances];
    }

    public long GetByteSize()
    {
        //Make one to make sure it is jitted
        _generator();

        long oldSize = GC.GetTotalMemory(false);
        for(int i=0; i < NumberOfInstances; i++)
        {
            _memArray[i] = _generator();
        }
        long newSize = GC.GetTotalMemory(false);
        return (newSize - oldSize) / NumberOfInstances;
    }
}

Usage:

Should be created with a Func that generates new Instances of T. Make sure the same instance is not returned everytime. E.g. This would be fine:

    public long SizeOfSomeObject()
    {
        var measure = new MeasureSize<SomeObject>(() => new SomeObject());
        return measure.GetByteSize();
    }

I had to boil this down all the way to IL level, but I finally got this functionality into C# with a very tiny library.

You can get it (BSD licensed) at bitbucket

Example code:

using Earlz.BareMetal;

...
Console.WriteLine(BareMetal.SizeOf<int>()); //returns 4 everywhere I've tested
Console.WriteLine(BareMetal.SizeOf<string>()); //returns 8 on 64-bit platforms and 4 on 32-bit
Console.WriteLine(BareMetal.SizeOf<Foo>()); //returns 16 in some places, 24 in others. Varies by platform and framework version

...

struct Foo
{
  int a, b;
  byte c;
  object foo;
}

Basically, what I did was write a quick class-method wrapper around the sizeof IL instruction. This instruction will get the raw amount of memory a reference to an object will use. For instance, if you had an array of T, then the sizeof instruction would tell you how many bytes apart each array element is.

This is extremely different from C#'s sizeof operator. For one, C# only allows pure value types because it's not really possible to get the size of anything else in a static manner. In contrast, the sizeof instruction works at a runtime level. So, however much memory a reference to a type would use during this particular instance would be returned.

You can see some more info and a bit more in-depth sample code at my blog