Recent versions of Chrome DevTools have a new profiling feature called 'Record allocation profile' that may help. Enable this around a few of the sawtooth and it will give you a profile based on a sampling of allocations that happen during that period. The profile will include the stack-trace at the time of the allocation which should help you figure out where the allocations are coming from.

Thanks, this view looks really interesting and I hadn't looked at it deeply.

With that said, do you have any advice on how to use it in practice? Timeline profiles tell me my app goes through maybe 5MB of heap per second, but when I use this feature for say, 5 seconds, it tends to report 2-3 functions as having allocated 16kb each. (And if I run it again, I get similar results but with a different 2-3 functions.) Is it just reporting a very small subset of allocations?

This profiler is sampling based. It takes a sample once every 512KiB allocated (on average, randomized) and reports all the allocations still alive at the end of the interval. So, yes it reports the subset of allocations that are sampled and are 'leaking' from the interval. In that sense it is better at finding memory leaks.

If you want to look at all the allocations during the interval, then you can use the 'Allocation timeline' profile – this will give you all the allocations but note that this might have significant overhead.

Thanks for the info. Is there a way to get the Allocation timeline to report about all allocations though? It seems to only report objects that are uncollected (that show up as blue in the timeline). That's useful for finding true leaks, but in my case (trying to fix a sawtooth pattern of heap usage), stuff that was allocated and then quickly GC'ed is exactly what I want to know about. Or am I looking in the wrong place?

You are going to hate this one but its effective - divide and conquer. Just strip out features in a binary-chop fashion and rerun the memory profile. Depending on the code, it doesn't take as long as you think it will to get to small units of functionality e.g. sounds like just commenting out the 3d engine render step would be informative to you.

As I commented to a different reply, skipping the render step does indeed remove the sawtooth, which is why I think the problem is in the 3D engine. Past that, it's not so easy to jump into a three.js-sized chunk of 3rd party code and find atomic things that can be turned off in such a way that everything else still functions.

(I mean, not to suggest that what you describe isn't useful - I'm just hoping to use profiling tools to attack from a different direction.)

Understood.

>> not so easy to jump into a three.js-sized chunk of 3rd party code and find atomic things that can be turned off

Incidentally, doing a dissection like this is actually an engaging way to learn a big chunk of 3rd party code compared to just staring at it. By stubbing out various pieces you learn where the joints are where things are entangled nests of sorrow.