On 03/10/2013 12:30 PM, Richard Braun wrote: > Any news about this change ? Yeah, I'm still running with the patch. I must say I don't find it generally useful enough to warrant replacing the cached/buffer distinction with. I'm all in favour of a patch that allows an option (like under F2 "Setup"/"Meters"/"Memory Bar", e.g. "Memory Detail" or "Memory Breakdown").
Since my last report/query I have seen a case where 'dirty' pages reported was significant (>10miB). I think that was while `pvmove`-ing LVM2 physical volumes from one SSD to another, live. And another time while copying virtual machines. However, like I said before, the output of `vmstat`, `iotop` is more useful to me (also, it can be logged and graphed for multiple servers). If the figure is really that meaningful to anyone else, I'd expect a log/graph with peak values to be much more interesting, as this is very volatile information, and IME sysadmins can't monitor all their systems visually 24/7. I like the fact that cache/buffer is normally shown, as (a) it reminds people how block, dentry and inode cache work (b) it shows me whether my system's memory is being utilized. Remember we're not all sys-adminning virtual server hosts. At the htop devs: I'm just reporting from the field, feel free to opt whichever way you deem best (you probably talk to a lot more endusers than I do, and I might be blind to a few usecases :)) Cheers, Seth ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev _______________________________________________ htop-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htop-general
