Re: lessdisks: client with only 20MB ram
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
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
P.S.
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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBjKuEn7DbMsAkQLgRAsMGAJ9Cp+ne8zI7XmU1m0CjoB3e+LlG8wCfa7xv
XX9l+YNJM4/Au1VIYlHBr34=
=xQtg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: