On Jul 5, 2013, at 3:57 PM, Steve Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> Gary/Owen -
> 
> Thanks for the quick response from both of you.
> 
> I forgot about Purge... it seemed like such a kludge I guess I dropped it 
> from my memory soon after learning about it.    My analytic approach to some 
> things has me trying to unearth root causes when a simple, practical relief 
> is nearby.
> 
> I think that Mountain Lion did not solve the "problem" of freeing inactive 
> memory, but it may have solved the problem of letting that step slow down 
> interactivity.  I don't see it doing it, even though it must be.  Under my 4G 
> 10.6 system, I think that is what was dogging my system... OSX having to stop 
> everything while it freed some inactive memory.   
> 
> Gary, are you saying that you not only get your physical memory saturated 
> (with a bunch of Inactive) or that you see that causing problems at the user 
> level (spinning wheels!).

I still get spinning whatchamcallits, even with Apple's own apps (especially 
iTunes - I have my music library on my Time Capsule, served over the wireless 
network, so it's primarily the first time after not having that volume mounted 
for a while). Same goes for Mail.app - spinning wheels at times. Spinning 
wheels are more frequent as free memory gets lower, but even with lots free, 
still some spinning.

I must say that despite not really being a fan of Microsoft, Windows 7 does 
perform very well (even in a 2GB VM). If I had it to do over (or next time), I 
would look into a laptop with Linux as the installed OS, and running Windows 
under VMWare or VirtualBox. I mainly went with another MacBook Pro in case I 
want to do iOS development, and to stay in Apple's good graces, a "Hackintosh" 
doesn't cut it.

;; Gary

> 
> I would guess that with an SSD, that step, while maybe handled poorly 
> otherwise becomes below the noticeable threshold of the user?   
> 
> I'm also unclear on exactly how virtual memory is handled on these new 
> high-memory machines.  I grew up in the era where physical memory was tiny 
> (by today's standards) and virtual memory management was critical to 
> time-sharing... as far as I can tell from my activity monitor/process table, 
> none of my applications are actually *using* swap space?   Isn't that the 
> point of an indicator that you actually HAVE free memory available?   I would 
> expect a tool that also showed how much swap space was being used by what 
> processes, and in fact if I dredge my own memory might find that some of the 
> tools from the "golden days of UNIX" are still relevant!
> 
> - Steve


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Reply via email to