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

RE: 2.4.0 and shared memory



great info, but ... how can i see the 'actual' memory use when running 2.4.0
?

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:pbrutsch@tux.creighton.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 4:04 PM
To: Amal Phadke
Cc: Debian User List
Subject: Re: 2.4.0 and shared memory


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...

> Hi all,
>
>    I am using Potato with 2.4.0 right now. I have noticed that 'free'
> command now reports 0 shared memory and 0 swap usage. With kernel
> 2.2.18, it used to report few megabytes of shared memory. My box has
> half a gig of RAM, but when I was using 2.2.18 kernel, the system used
> at least some swap space, especially after I ran one of my memory
> hungry Fortran programs or after creating a CD image. But now it's 0
> no matter. Has anyone else noticed this behavior?

This is normal for 2.4.  Some fields in /proc/meminfo (which 'free' uses
to gather it's information) are not longer used, thus read 0 (totally
removing those unused fields will totally break 'free').  'free' just
doesn't know that those fields are used any more.

2.4 also totally re-did the VM subsystem, and moves unused stuff to swap
much less often.  Primarily because the VM subsystem is more efficient.

- -- 
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Brutsche				    pbrutsch@tux.creighton.edu

GPG fingerprint: 9BF9 D84C 37D0 4FA7 1F2D  7E5E FD94 D264 50DE 1CFC
GPG key id: 50DE1CFC
GPG public key: http://tux.creighton.edu/~pbrutsch/gpg-public-key.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE6ZwX8/ZTSZFDeHPwRAgNsAJ42tEafjwdQdBkU30uAk4vhO9NN6wCfWYHt
N/6hEfbXVNvGeqxdnGvXIA8=
=+mUb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: