From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 20 12:19:59 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD5CB37B401 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 12:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (12-233-57-131.client.attbi.com [12.233.57.131]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B26143FE9 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 12:19:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.9/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h3KJJu8M004994; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 12:19:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.9/8.12.5/Submit) id h3KJJubQ004993; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 12:19:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 12:19:56 -0700 From: David Schultz To: Lucky Green Message-ID: <20030420191956.GA4963@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: Lucky Green , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20030420101401.GA2821@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <003201c30751$dccffef0$6601a8c0@VAIO650> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <003201c30751$dccffef0$6601a8c0@VAIO650> cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Broken memory management on system with no swap X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 19:20:00 -0000 On Sun, Apr 20, 2003, Lucky Green wrote: > David wrote quoting Bruce: > > > So the bug is mainly in vm making only a relatively useless > > statistic > > > available. On my systems, `Inact' is usually mainly for > > (non-dirty) > > > VMIO pages. > > > > Right. dillon was planning to separate out the dirty and > > clean pages in the inactive queue at some point. ISTR that > > his intent was along the lines of optimizing write clustering > > by making dirty pages easier to find, or something along > > those lines. But the number of inactive dirty pages is > > useful as a statistic by itself, too. > > So how do I find out what is consuming those "inactive" pages? And how > do I determine if those pages can be discarded or not? 'top -ores' will tell you which processes are hogging the most memory, but the system does not keep accurate statistics on clean vs dirty or swap-backed vs fs-backed pages. Nevertheless, that might give you some idea of where your 1 GB of memory has gone. > Exactly. Which is why I just replaced my old 128MB RAM/256MB swap server > with a new 1GB RAM server. I still fail to understand why a setup that > never was anywhere near running out of memory in the previous > configuration would run out of memory with more RAM than it had RAM and > swap combined. If I can't do in 1GB what I could do in 128 + 256 MB, > then somewhere there is a bug. How do I find out where? It would be useful to know whether dillon's suggestion fixes your problem.