From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 12 14:17:33 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1764D106566C for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mexas@bristol.ac.uk) Received: from dirg.bris.ac.uk (dirg.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA1F58FC16 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from seis.bris.ac.uk ([137.222.10.93]) by dirg.bris.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NUhYl-0004sU-OP for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:31 +0000 Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk ([137.222.187.241]) by seis.bris.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1NUhYl-0002qa-5a for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:27 +0000 Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0CEHQai039722 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:26 GMT (envelope-from mexas@bristol.ac.uk) Received: (from mexas@localhost) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o0CEHQ1a039721 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:26 GMT (envelope-from mexas@bristol.ac.uk) X-Authentication-Warning: mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk: mexas set sender to mexas@bristol.ac.uk using -f Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:26 +0000 From: Anton Shterenlikht To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100112141726.GA23278@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Spam-Score: -1.5 X-Spam-Level: - Subject: top/ps: is Active Memory = sum(resident set size)? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:17:33 -0000 This has probably been discussed before, so apology for asking the same question again. Should the Active memory, as reported by top(1), be equal to the sum of rss (the real memory (resident set) size of the process) of all processes, as reported by ps(1)? The sum of ps(1) rss fields is probably the same as the sum of RES fields of top(1). I seem to have much bigger Active set than the sum of all resident (or real) memories used by all processes. Please advise many thanks anton -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 331 5944 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423