[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: lessdisks: client with only 20MB ram

Hash: SHA1

On 06-11-2004 07:47, Finn-Arne Johansen wrote:

>>By accident I configured a diskless machine with only 20MB ram. It has
>>been running fine for weeks, and I found out when I plugged in a USB
>>device and the music streamed to the box clicked (because the kernel
>>desperately tried to kill processes to make room).
> so 20 MB was sufficient until you tried to stream music to the box ? 

20 MB is sufficient to...
 * Run an X11 server accessing remote X11 apps (like an Ogg player)
 * Receive music streamed from remote server.
 * Run an SSH daemon.

Plugging in a USB stick (while logged into the box with bash and mc
open) made the music click and stall for approx. a minute, and
investigating it revealed that probing and mounting made the kernel
desperately kill processes).

Sorry for the bad description before.

>>It has been said several times on this (and/or the norwegian) list that
>>LTSP clients must be 32+ MB or use network swapping.
> In the current configuration, yes. 

Has it ever been suggested that a different configuration of LTSP can
make it work with less?

I am very interested in understanding what are the shortcomings of using
low-memory machines.

I am also interested in understanding if the shortcomings are different
between LTSP- and lessdisks-based clients.

>>On this machine with (according to free) only 20 MB ram, in addition to
>>XFree86 I run esd, mc and sshd on the box. This also means I have access
>>to manipulate it: Tell me what to test - which applications executed on
>>a truly thin client that are expected to eat memory on the client.
> I think the application that eats memory is using XFS on the
> application-server.

My current setup uses XFS on the application server.

Could you be more specific? Do you have other suggestions?

>>I suspect LTSP ram requirements might be caused by memory leaks in X11
>>font handling code or similar, which might not be an issue when using
>>the X11 binaries thoroughly patched and packaged for Debian (as is the
>>case when using lessdisks instead of LTSP).
> THat may be, and that is also the reason why I want to use lessdisks.
> But as far as I remember thing werer running smoothly with 16MB without
> swap before we activated xfs. 

...which is exactly what I mean by suspecting "font handling code".

 - Jonas


Please do not cc me - I am subscribed to the list. :-)

- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: