On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 08:38:18PM +0100, Koen Deforche wrote:
The way I understand it, linux overcommits memory: malloc() will
It depends. On uclinux, or with uclinuxish software stacks, it does
not overcommit.
--
regards,
Jakob
It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you
2008/11/25 Jakov af Wallby [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 08:38:18PM +0100, Koen Deforche wrote:
The way I understand it, linux overcommits memory: malloc() will
It depends. On uclinux, or with uclinuxish software stacks, it does
not overcommit.
There are probably a few places
Hello Wim,
Am Dienstag, den 25.11.2008, 15:53 +0100 schrieb Wim Dumon:
2008/11/25 Jakov af Wallby [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 08:38:18PM +0100, Koen Deforche wrote:
The way I understand it, linux overcommits memory: malloc() will
It depends. On uclinux, or with
Hello folks,
With the actual WT release our application uses 36MB of RAM.
Considering the fact that the system has only 32 MB at all,
this is a major problem.
Has anybody any idea how to minimize the memory footprint
of an WT application ?
Goetz
--
Goetz Babin-Ebell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4G
Hey Goetz,
2008/11/24 Goetz Babin-Ebell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello folks,
With the actual WT release our application uses 36MB of RAM.
Considering the fact that the system has only 32 MB at all,
this is a major problem.
The way you phrase your question suggests you saw a big jump in memory
Hey Goetz,
2008/11/24 Goetz Babin-Ebell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The way you phrase your question suggests you saw a big jump in memory
usage with the latest release?
With 2.1.5 it was a problem (20MB), but not that burning...
I think I have found a reason for this behaviour: threads were
Hey Goetz,
2008/11/24 Goetz Babin-Ebell [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
That is okay. But, those are mapped memory, not actually used. Mapped
memory does not consume memory until it is actually used (i.e.
swapped in).
And that is the problem:
It is an embedded device, which means no swap.
And
