Re: Clearing SWAP
On Fri May 2 2008, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> I don't think anyone said that XFCE4 used as much CPU power as KDE, its
> the memory thing that makes GTK2 a pain for me. While I use Konq for
> most browsing there are a couple of websites I use that have bugs that
> only Iceweasel can ignore. I need to use my big box for that, then of
> course get back out of Iceweasel to a saner world.
big box, small box.. I have one desktop and 1 laptop...
>
> I used to use XFCE4-terminal, since it did what I need in a way I like,
> but if I left it open, away would go the memory. Now I have mrxvt setup
> to work almost the same as the XFCE4 terminal (nice fonts, tabs,
> off-white background, etc) with far less memory used.
I always leave terminals up and running.. right now I have a shell - Konsole
window and a terminal - terminal window.. I'm not sure what the difference
is, but one is black text on white, the other is white text on black. I'm in
the middle of a movie conversion using ffmpeg and I am getting:
top - 08:17:17 up 19:26, 4 users, load average: 1.04, 1.36, 1.45
Tasks: 174 total, 3 running, 169 sleeping, 0 stopped, 2 zombie
Cpu(s): 50.4%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 49.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 2075308k total, 2024600k used, 50708k free, 118460k buffers
Swap: 2104472k total, 816k used, 2103656k free, 1128936k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
8268 pbc 25 0 31640 18m 2176 R 100 0.9 53:51.56 ffmpeg
5223 root 16 0 87180 58m 12m S 1 2.9 37:45.27 Xorg
6012 pbc 15 0 27224 15m 8824 R 0 0.8 0:01.59 xfce4-terminal
1 root 15 0 2088 716 612 S 0 0.0 0:03.16 init
2 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.01 migration/0
3 root 34 19 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:06.25 ksoftirqd/0
4 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 migration/1
5 root 34 19 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.08 ksoftirqd/1
6 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.10 events/0
7 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.01 events/1
8 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0
and that doesn't include the other user logged in..
--
Paul Cartwright
Registered Linux user # 367800
Registered Ubuntu User #12459
Reply to: