Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 14:09:56 -0400 From: "Josh Carroll" <josh.carroll@gmail.com> To: "Bill Moran" <wmoran@potentialtech.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More RAM for buffers? Message-ID: <8cb6106e0810021109m7a82d3d3j7e29f9e0ba406e13@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20081002131435.efa1d07f.wmoran@potentialtech.com> References: <200810020958.54563.kirk@strauser.com> <200810021004.56210.kirk@strauser.com> <20081002131435.efa1d07f.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> inactive, cache, and buffer are all different types of "buffer".
That is my understanding as well.
> I'm fairly sure that inactive is memory used by program code. When the
> program terminates, the memory is marked as inactive, which means the
> next time the program starts the code can simply be moved back to
> active and the program need not be reloaded from disk.
I think non-program code can also be "inactive".
For example, top memory output before:
Mem: 337M Active, 1455M Inact, 407M Wired, 352K Cache, 214M Buf, 1745M Free
and after: find /usr/src -type f -print0 | xargs -0 cat > /dev/null 2>&1
Mem: 348M Active, 1905M Inact, 402M Wired, 912K Cache, 214M Buf, 1288M Free
I am also not sure exactly what constitutes each of these. I only know
what the top man page says. And for Buf it says:
Buf: number of pages used for BIO-level disk caching
I'm not entirely sure what "BIO-level disk caching" is, but it is
apparently NOT the caching of filesystem data.
Josh
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8cb6106e0810021109m7a82d3d3j7e29f9e0ba406e13>