From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 30 12:43:16 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB4F93B for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:43:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com) Received: from alogreentechnologies.com (alogreentechnologies.com [67.212.224.110]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4B618FC08 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:43:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from X220.ovitrap.com ([122.129.201.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by alogreentechnologies.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q9UCh8IU020907; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:43:13 -0600 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 19:43:07 +0700 From: Erich Dollansky To: Karl Pielorz Subject: Re: Threaded 6.4 code compiled under 9.0 uses a lot more memory?.. Message-ID: <20121030194307.57e5c5a3@X220.ovitrap.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20121030182727.48f5e649@X220.ovitrap.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd10.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:43:16 -0000 Hi, On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:59:46 +0000 Karl Pielorz wrote: > > > --On 30 October 2012 18:27 +0700 Erich Dollansky > wrote: > > > is it still the same compiler? > > Depends how you mean 'the same' - on the 6.4 system it shows: > > cc (GCC) 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 > > And, on the 9.0-S it shows: > > cc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD] > > So 'same' - but different versions. > did you check the default data sizes? > > I assume that it is a plain FreeBSD program without X. > > Yes. They are 'plain' programs - no X or anything. > > Now they've been running for an hour or so - they've gotten a little > larger 552M/154M and 703M/75M. > > If it's not harmful I can live with it - it was just a bit of a > surprise. And a reason to spend more money on memory. Knowing the real reason would be better. I can understand your surprise. Erich