Date: Mon, 04 May 2015 11:01:13 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Cc: suresh gumpula <gsuryacse7k@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Memory foot print on BSD 9.1 Message-ID: <7264664.ze1moPZzvB@ralph.baldwin.cx> In-Reply-To: <CAJOqHmitA0mFBjM0vqtYxqoep4fymtpcxr%2BwBhKsCv6Z5sTGJg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAJOqHmitA0mFBjM0vqtYxqoep4fymtpcxr%2BwBhKsCv6Z5sTGJg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, March 13, 2015 11:51:27 AM suresh gumpula wrote: > Hello VM experts, > I am trying to figure out what has been changed from 8.1 to 9.1 which > results more memory footprint on all processes. looking at one of the big > processes we have on a idle machine, > its about 35M resident size increase. Looking at map entries by procstat > -v shows me that two libraries , one is our internal library(libmgwd) and > other one is boost consume more now. > There are no changes made with respect to process, just comparing after the > upgrade to 9.1. > > Is there any knows things with respect VM has been changed and could result > in more resident memory ? Can somebody please help on this to know what > exactly causing this behaviour ? > Details below. > > Thank you! I'll have to think about your patch, but for figuring out what is going on, can you figure out which sections have changed size? For example, if .text has increased, perhaps see if you can find individual functions that have changed in one of the libraries in question and compare their disassembly? Also, are you using clang on 9.x? (It might generate quite different code from GCC, though I think cc is still GCC by default on 9.x, so you'd have to use clang explicitly.) If your increased usage is in anonymous memory, then you might want to look at malloc stats and see if changes to jemalloc(3) are caching more "free" memory in your process. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7264664.ze1moPZzvB>