That does sound a bit too high (should be more around 20 MB for the parameters that you mention). Memory utilization in 0.7.0c should not be higher than 0.7.0b (rather lower). These days I use valgrind with the command from the attached shell script to profile gnunetd's memory utilization (note that valgrind itself increases the footprint quite a bit), and I've yet been unable to detect any problems with 0.7.0c. The expected values are documented in doc/memoryuse.txt (in svn).
So if you want to help, it would be great if you could use valgrind/massif to gather some profiles -- that would help me see where the problem might be. Note however that with valgrind your CPU usage will go up significantly, which in turn may lower the #connections gnunetd will establish (and create possibly other artefacts that one would not observe without valgrind). And I guess I might mention the obvious workaround: restart gnunetd (not a good solution, but if you need a solution *now*, that's your best bet ;-)). Otherwise, please report any findings (as in, valgrind traces, etc.) to Mantis so that we can try to address the issue. Cheers! Christian On Tuesday 11 April 2006 07:31, David Kuehling wrote: > Hi, > > did something about gnunetd's memory consumption change from from > version B to C? top shows currently 116Mb of resident memory which is > much more than I had previosly seen. > > How is that memory consumption related to datastore size and number of > connected peers? According to gnunet-stats, my datastore is currently > approaching the 5GB mark and 17 peers are connected. > > regards, > > David
valgrind --tool=massif --alloc-fn=xmalloc_unchecked_ --alloc-fn=xmalloc_ --depth=10 --alloc-fn=xgrow_ bin/gnunetd -d -L DEBUG
_______________________________________________ Help-gnunet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnunet
