On Aug 10, 2010, at 10:50 AM, Jonathon Kuo wrote: > On Aug 10, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Jared Earle wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Jonathon Kuo >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Aug 9, 2010, at 7:27 PM, Michael_google gmail_Gersten wrote: >> >> > 4 GB is plenty of memory. You should not need that much. >> >> How rude... the new Safari was approaching 2.5 GB of VM, then it blew. Bits >> flew everywhere. Looks like it still suffers from 'VM bloat'. I've tried >> this before, closing all windows and emptying the cache, but Safari >> jealously holds onto all the VM it can -- and never reuses it. Load a new >> page, and its VM size increases still more. Something's wrong >> architecturally, methinks... >> >> VM isn't that big a deal. my VM is currently at 220GB: >> >> PhysMem: 879M wired, 1424M active, 172M inactive, 2475M used, 9813M free. >> VM: 220G vsize, 1042M framework vsize, 83722(1) pageins, 0(0) pageouts. > > I think that's total VM usage across all processes: > > PhysMem: 787M wired, 4734M active, 1514M inactive, 7035M used, 1156M free. > VM: 291G vsize, 1040M framework vsize, 516579(0) pageins, 486(0) pageouts. > > I meant only the VM used by the Safari process, VSIZE: > > PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #WQ #PORT #MREG RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE > VSIZE > 403 Safari 21.4 03:06:48 20 2 1065 7065 515M 219M 810M > 15794M >
Also irrelevant. If you understand how VM works. All the system libraries that Safari has open count against the VM total for Safari, for example. Whether or not they are actually loaded. IIRC
_______________________________________________ MacOSX-talk mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-talk
