Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 17:20:05 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: robh@imdb.com (Rob Hartill) Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2.2 using more memory than 2.17 ? Message-ID: <199704012220.RAA03023@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96.970401212144.12238A-100000@localhost> from Rob Hartill at "Apr 1, 97 09:29:36 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Looking at "top" on some of my servers, the ones I've moved to 2.2 are > using far more memory than those still on 2.1.7 > > Is this to be expected ? > Yes, but the effects are minimal. > > e.g. on identical P6s the 2.2 box has "60-70mb" active and the 2.1.7 > box has "30-40mb". Two P5s running 2.1.7/2.2 show the same type of > difference. > When thinking of "memory usage" the values of the various page counts is very difficult to interpret. I think that the best indication of running low on memory is to see increased paging. Think of the page counts as large caches. Those caches can be active or (passive, inactive) (coining terminology here.) > > I'm running an Apache binary with mod_perl that was compiled on a 2.1.7 > system. Would the old binary/libs make a difference w.r.t memory usage ? > There's little else running on the machines. > I'll recompile my httpd when I've finished upgrading all the machines. > I wouldn't worry too awful much, unless I/O rates (either in paging or file I/O due to buffer cache misses) are increased. The new code is even more intelligent about not aging often used pages. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704012220.RAA03023>