From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Oct 21 15:34:27 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 807CB106566C
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:34:27 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.99])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5AF78FC13
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:34:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9LFYPAh013328;
	Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:34:25 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost)
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.4/Submit) with ESMTP id
	p9LFYOsI013325; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:34:24 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:34:24 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <j7rnbt$nfa$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110211732170.13284@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <4EA0610B.90206@gmail.com>
	<20111021084413.GA46039@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
	<4EA1471E.9050501@gmail.com> <j7rhc9$bvb$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<4EA15004.50308@gmail.com> <j7rnbt$nfa$1@dough.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
	(wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]);
	Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:34:25 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Measuring memory footprint in C/C++ code on FreeBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:34:27 -0000

>> footprint?
>
> Almost certainly yes. Measuring virtual memory is significantly less
> important for real-world loads. Some of this is very nicely described
> here: https://www.varnish-cache.org/trac/wiki/ArchitectNotes .

definitely.
just run top and compare RES and SIZE fields.

extreme example:

#include <unistd.h>
int blah[1000000000];
main(){sleep(1000);}


run it and see this in top
13317 wojtek        1  45    0  3817M   684K nanslp  0   0:00  0.00% 1