On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:14:51PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote: > hmm, on Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 11:51:12AM +0200, mickey said that > > On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 11:37:14AM +0200, frantisek holop wrote: > > > i know ps is only showing what was, or might have been, not what it is.. > > > but how come in one moment 40-50 (out of the total 110-120 processes) > > > are "swapped out" and in the next instant none of them? > > > > status "swapped out" does not mean they are physically and completely > > written out of memory. the "swapped out" status only means that in > > but if that is the case, is top(1) wrong in showing RES 4k for these > processes? doesn't this mean that they are not in memory anymore?
4k is memory isn't it? (: cu -- paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has remained)