From owner-freebsd-questions Sat Aug 31 9: 7:44 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49DBB37B400 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 09:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (lowellg.ne.client2.attbi.com [24.147.188.198]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E07B43E3B for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 09:07:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.no-ip.com) Received: from be-well.ilk.org (lowellg.ne.client2.attbi.com [24.147.188.198]) by be-well.ilk.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g7VG7eNE017505 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 12:07:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.no-ip.com) Received: (from lowell@localhost) by be-well.ilk.org (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g7VG7d1O017502; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 12:07:39 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: be-well.ilk.org: lowell set sender to freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org using -f To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: I have Inactive Memory?! not just free..but inactive References: <20020831061817.GA12937@houston.rr.com> From: Lowell Gilbert Date: 31 Aug 2002 12:07:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20020831061817.GA12937@houston.rr.com> Message-ID: <44y9anovuc.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> Lines: 20 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Joseph Lephan writes: > heres a little snippet from my 'top': > "Mem: 151M Active, 194M Inact, 69M Wired, 24M Cache, 61M Buf, 62M Free" > > Y? Why is 194M inactive? I'm not too familiar with the other categories, but 'inactive'sends a tingle up my spine > > Is inactive memory similar to reserved memory? No. Please read the FAQ. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/misc.html#TOP-FREEMEM > Also from 'top': > "CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 0.0% idle" > > Question, Does the 'GENERIC' kernel conf omit any cpu-monitoring options? If so, what should i do to remedy this? No, it doesn't. Most often, this is a problem of mismatched userland and kernel. I seem to recall a case where there was an actual bug in the relevant code, but that was fixed a while back. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message