From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jun 9 16:31:10 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA10413 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 16:31:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from post.io.org (post.io.org [198.133.36.6]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA10403; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 16:31:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zap.io.org (taob@zap.io.org [198.133.36.81]) by post.io.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA15761; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 19:30:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 19:30:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Brian Tao To: dyson@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Memory leak or reporting problem in 2.2-960501-SNAP? In-Reply-To: <199606092253.RAA29425@dyson.iquest.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 9 Jun 1996, John S. Dyson wrote: > > The RSS refers to the pages mapped into the process, but those pages > may or may not be "active." Active has to do with the in-memory > priority (sort of). Whether or not a page is mapped has little to > do with that. So what should I trust if I'm evaluating the memory load on a server? 'ps' obviously does not account for all aspects of memory usage. I always found the breakdown in 'top' to be quite useful, except for this one instance showing 91M active with only ~50 httpd's and ~20 ftpd's running. > EEEK!!! I think that I have a fix for that, that I am willing to commit > to -current. Goody. :) > 2.2-current is MUCH MUCH better in the VM arena than snap right now. > I have been holding off anything but simple bug fixes in current, and > I'll commit the proposed (maybe) fix for that tonight (Sun.) Quick questions here (and I guess this goes back to the -stable vs. -current discussion elsewhere)... I'm running a 2.2-SNAP and not the recently released 2.1-SNAP. To which snapshot are you referring? > It has been very painful, but the VM code is better than it has ever > been (except for perhaps a few lurking bugs.) Cool, and here I thought FreeBSD's VM was already pretty much state-of-the-art in terms of speed and efficiency. :) Thanks. -- Brian Tao (BT300, taob@io.org, taob@ican.net) Systems and Network Administrator, Internet Canada Corp. "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't"