Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 20:52:57 +0300 From: "Eugene" <genie@geniechka.ru> To: <dgw@liwest.at>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Strange memory problems Message-ID: <002001c642d9$320fcab0$1b12c055@genie> References: <005b01c642bb$23e007c0$1b12c055@genie> <200603081756.36597.dgw@liwest.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> With Apache stopped, it goes down to RSS=0.5GB and VSZ=0.6G -- but >> Inactive >> Memory remains above 2.5GB. >> Is it a memory leak somewhere or what? > > That looks quite normal to me, apart from the zombie process. FreeBSD > always > attempts to occupy most of the RAM, because it's a very fast way of saving > information, and after all a lot of RAM is of no use if there's nothing in > it. So long as no other program needs it for more "important" information, > there's nothing wrong with keeping a lot of "unimportant" stuff around in > case it is needed again quickly. Ok, that's nice. However, I was concerned not so much with low Free memory as with Act+Inact being 1.5-4 times greater than size of running processes. What data is there, exactly? I don't think it has more than 1GB of unsynced disk writes? Also, a more general question: how do I estimate 'real' memory load? Sum(RSS) + 0.5*DiskCache ? For example, I would like to know (in advance) e.g. how many Apache processes we can handle before memory becomes a problem. Do you think it would be nice if top(1) could give some consolidated measure -- probably taking into account usage statistics and/or response time? Or at least two measures -- e.g. "How much memory can be allocated off-hand without any disk I/O" and "How much memory can be allocated so that swapped data would not have to be re-read again in reasonable time"? Thanks a lot Eugene
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002001c642d9$320fcab0$1b12c055>