On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 06:53:43PM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote: > On Apr 03 2001, Jens Benecke wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 12:35:20PM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote: > > > Using a Pentium MMX 200MHz overclocked to 250MHz with 64MB, > > > Konqueror (and KDE in general) is a bit slow. The problem seems to > > > be the memory needs of KDE, which unfortunately are quite high for > > > my computer. :-( This is, BTW, the same problem with Mozilla (and > > > StarOffice also). > > > > Just For The Record. (tm). On my machine, a fully started KDE (which > > takes 30 seconds but I do it once a day, if at all, so I don't care) > > including a couple Konqueror windows eats just about as much memory as > > *TWO* Netscape windows, without all the fluff around them. > How exactly do you measure the memory that some program requires? A > you using memstat or anything else? Just using ps or top? The.. What I did was: Boot, start KDE, start two konqueror windows, browse a little, and "ps axuwc", "free". Reboot, start icewm, start two Netscapes, browse a little, see Netscpae eating >50MB, "ps axuwc", "free". Then compare the "free" values at "+/- buffers". That's the free memory that you'd have if Linux didn't use it for hard disk caching, i.e. the memory not occupied by applications. "ps" output was just for reference. If you use "ps" directly, you'll see that each KDE process takes at least 10MB away. But AFAIU, most of those 10MB is shared between all KDE processes anyway, so there isn't a problem. > .., my question is not a provocation, but an honest question: how > does one measure the memory requirements of software in a more or > less reliable way (it needs not to be pretty accurate, but it > should give a more or less consistent measure), so that I can > figure out how much memory KDE takes? Read below for my motivation. Try the above - compare "free" values. > > Start Konqueror under another WM, e.g. icewm (it needs to start up > > kdeinit, so the first time will be slower) and notice its mem > > requirements then. > I wasn't exactly refering to its startup time (I'm not concerned if > a given software that I use takes 18 or 22 seconds to fire up). I > was refering to constant swapping while using it with my Pentium > with 64MB of RAM. :-( Well, I'm using it on a Laptop (with 64MB RAM) and it isn't "constantly swapping". Even with two konquerors (one fullscreen), XMMS playing a MP3, mixer/system status/clock/kwikdisk/knotes/newsticker in the panel, and a full-screen wallpaper, "+/- buffers still tells me I have about 22 MB free. Swap is used 20MB however, but that doesn't affect performance too much. My main workstation has 192MB however. > Using my Duron with 128MB of RAM, things are much better, but I'd > like to install KDE for friends with el-cheapo computers that are > equipped with Celerons and with 32MB of RAM. For these computers 32MB is too little. Even Windows will crawl with this amount of RAM. > (which are the majority of computers sold in my country, > unfortunately -- perhaps some with 64MB of RAM), the smaller the > programs are, the better. Don't use KDE on a 32MB machine. If you want a fast, stable, easy GUI for a 32MB machine, install OS/2. I'm serious. -- " ...screams erupted at a Seattle hotel where Microsoft founder Bill Gates was addressing an education and technology conference. (...)" -- cnn.com, Reportage über das Erdbeben in Seattle · http://www.hitchhikers.de/ - Die kostenlose Mitfahrzentrale für ganz Europa
Attachment:
pgpQiO1ymqdiJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature