On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 01:30:55PM +0000, Bob Ham wrote: > On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 08:41 +0000, NextGen$ wrote: > > On the server we have ~100M of data and the memory footprint is ~25M. The > > usual size for a datastore is 1G... > > Let me requote some mails here; you've obviously missed the point: > > On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 18:44 +0000, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:39:05PM +0000, Bob Ham wrote: > > > > Even disregarding the > > > database, fred's memory footprint is massive. > > > Negative. I was running it with a maximum memory setting of 100MB, and > > 54MB+ of that was used by the database. If the database had respected > > the configured setting of 20MB, that would be a grand total of 64MB. > > Which IMHO is very reasonable. > > We're not talking about the memory requirements for the datastore. They > are, as you can in fact see above, explicitly excluded from the > discussion. > > I'll rephrase. Even if fred (not including the datastore) uses 64 MB, > that's still 8 times the memory footprint of apache. This is excessive.
No, if you exclude the store, that would be 44MB. Which appears to be reasonable to me. Obviously I'd prefer that it run in 10MB, but at some point we have to settle for a reasonable level of usage and get on with all the other things we need to do with Freenet. > > Bob -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070203/6668b7d3/attachment.pgp>
