On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:14:51PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 11:51:12AM +0200, mickey said that
> > On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 11:37:14AM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
> > > i know ps is only showing what was, or might have been, not what it is..
> > > but how come in one moment 40-50 (out of the total 110-120 processes)
> > > are "swapped out" and in the next instant none of them?
> >
> > status "swapped out" does not mean they are physically and completely
> > written out of memory. the "swapped out" status only means that in
>
> but if that is the case, is top(1) wrong in showing RES 4k for these
> processes? doesn't this mean that they are not in memory anymore?
4k is memory isn't it? (:
cu
--
paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has remained)
