internally reliable (what we print when run in debug memory mode)?
If you're looking for our managed memory usage, heap-buddy (a
summarizing profiler) and heap-shot (a snapshotting profiler) are the
best to use. They both give very accurate accounting for our managed
uses.
If you'
Hi,
On Nov 16, 2007 8:28 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 16, 2007 2:53 AM, Bjørn Haagensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 4. Could there be an option for collapsing all hits in the webinterface ?
>
> Why exactly do you need an option for collapsing all the hits in the
> we
> One of the reaons (actually, the only
> reason) I asked people to delete ~/.beagle if they were using trunk from
> before :)
Ahh, the ... M-word, "read the Manual". Sorry...
> BTW, in the list of debug tips I mailed yesterday, the heap-shot tip is last
> resort and requires extra effort. The t
> guessing the problem was caused by some error in my user Daemon.xml
> and/or FilesQueryable.xml causing the system-wide configuration files
> not to be read. They have been carried through since a long time ago,
> so perhaps somewhere along the line an update to beagle-settings have
> been incomp
On Nov 16, 2007 2:25 AM, Debajyoti Bera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > 3. Beagle indexes dot-files- and directories. Is this a new feature?
> > > > Why? Was there a discussion on the list about this?
> > >
> > > Are you sure about this one ? dot-files and directories should not be
> > > indexed
Hey, I'm doing some quick number crunching and was looking for a good
way to get accurate numbers on Beagles memory footprint, I know just
ps or top isn't very accurate, are the numbers reported by mono
internally reliable (what we print when run in debug memory mode)?
--
Cheers,
Kevin Kubasik
ht
On Nov 16, 2007 2:53 AM, Bjørn Haagensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 4. Could there be an option for collapsing all hits in the webinterface ?
Why exactly do you need an option for collapsing all the hits in the
webinterface? I'm not asking this because I think there shouldn't be
one, but to see
> > > 3. Beagle indexes dot-files- and directories. Is this a new feature?
> > > Why? Was there a discussion on the list about this?
> >
> > Are you sure about this one ? dot-files and directories should not be
> > indexed! Do you get those in search results ?
>
> Pretty much so. I thought it was v
Hi,
On Nov 15, 2007 10:45 PM, D Bera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> libbeagle API changed in 0.3.0 - the changes were minor but ilbbeagle
> clients need to be rebuilt with libbeagle1.so.0 (instead of
> libbeagle0.so.0)
Oh well. I'll try that. Luckily it's so easy in Ubuntu, so if
rebuilding nautil
> 1. when using the beagle backend nautilus search crashes. In
> .xsession-errors I get:
>
> nautilus: symbol lookup error: nautilus: undefined symbol:
> beagle_query_add_hit_type
libbeagle API changed in 0.3.0 - the changes were minor but ilbbeagle
clients need to be rebuilt with libbeagle1.so.0
Hi,
I'm running the pre-beta released tarball of libbeagle and beagle SVN
under Ubuntu Gutsy. It's looking nice. But ...
1. when using the beagle backend nautilus search crashes. In
.xsession-errors I get:
nautilus: symbol lookup error: nautilus: undefined symbol:
beagle_query_add_hit_type
I th
gt; situation:
>
This is undoubtedly my own ignorance spilling all over the place :)
> * All versions of Beagle through 0.2.2 triggered a memory leak
> in Mono that caused extremely high memory usage over time.
>
> * 0.2.3 contained a workaround for thi
ed extremely high memory usage over time.
* 0.2.3 contained a workaround for this problem, as a fixed Mono
hadn't been released at that time, but the workaround itself was
buggy and would cause exceptions and explosive memory usage,
particularly if
> The only thing unusual is that I have BeagleExceptions file (attached)
> with some warnings I don't understand. Not sure if it's relevant.
The exceptions dont look good. I'll look into them later.
Thanks,
- dBera
--
-
Debajyoti Bera @ http://d
Part of this might be related to the issue we had with TermBuffers not
being thread safe. Could you update to 0.2.5 and see if there is any
change?
-Kevin Kubasik
On 4/23/06, Carlos Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:18 -0400, Carlos Moffat wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2006-04
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:18 -0400, Carlos Moffat wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:09 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > > > > 3612 cmoffat 15 0 77728 39m 8220 S 19.0 2.6 20:46.95
> > > > > beagled-helper
> > > By the way, could you send me your numbers for top? I'd like to have a
> > > reference.
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:09 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > > > 3612 cmoffat 15 0 77728 39m 8220 S 19.0 2.6 20:46.95
> > > > beagled-helper
> > By the way, could you send me your numbers for top? I'd like to have a
> > reference.
>
> I am away from my laptop. But my figures for helper and beagl
> > > 3612 cmoffat 15 0 77728 39m 8220 S 19.0 2.6 20:46.95
> > > beagled-helper
> By the way, could you send me your numbers for top? I'd like to have a
> reference.
I am away from my laptop. But my figures for helper and beagled are
similar which are about the same as your helper's (30-40
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 18:35 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > top - 18:16:27 up 5:32, 2 users, load average: 0.61, 0.94, 1.02
> > Tasks: 2 total, 0 running, 2 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> > Cpu(s): 59.0% us, 8.7% sy, 0.0% ni, 24.3% id, 7.7% wa, 0.3% hi,
> > 0.0% si
> > Mem: 1554852k to
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 18:35 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > top - 18:16:27 up 5:32, 2 users, load average: 0.61, 0.94, 1.02
> > Tasks: 2 total, 0 running, 2 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> > Cpu(s): 59.0% us, 8.7% sy, 0.0% ni, 24.3% id, 7.7% wa, 0.3% hi,
> > 0.0% si
> > Mem: 1554852k to
> top - 18:16:27 up 5:32, 2 users, load average: 0.61, 0.94, 1.02
> Tasks: 2 total, 0 running, 2 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> Cpu(s): 59.0% us, 8.7% sy, 0.0% ni, 24.3% id, 7.7% wa, 0.3% hi,
> 0.0% si
> Mem: 1554852k total, 1474592k used,80260k free,28104k buffers
> Sw
Hi,
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 17:33 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > I'm using beagle 0.2.4 from Debian/Sid. Although the last version hasn't
> > reached Debian yet, I wanted to ask about memory usage. Right now,
> > beagled is using 55+ of all the memory (I have 1.5GB total). Th
> I'm using beagle 0.2.4 from Debian/Sid. Although the last version hasn't
> reached Debian yet, I wanted to ask about memory usage. Right now,
> beagled is using 55+ of all the memory (I have 1.5GB total). That seems
> like a lot, and as it's causing my computer to c
Hi,
I'm using beagle 0.2.4 from Debian/Sid. Although the last version hasn't
reached Debian yet, I wanted to ask about memory usage. Right now,
beagled is using 55+ of all the memory (I have 1.5GB total). That seems
like a lot, and as it's causing my computer to choke (speciall
> Did you also run it with "--debug-memory"? If so, please email the
> ~/.beagle/Log/current-Beagle log to me.
I am doing so now. I am currently using mono-1.1.8.2. Could I resolve
this problem by upgrading to 1.1.9?
Greg
___
Dashboard-hackers mai
there
> any other information that I could provide that may help in tracking
> down what is causing this runaway memory usage?
Did you also run it with "--debug-memory"? If so, please email the
~/.beagle/Log/current-Beagle log to me.
Joe
___
ng
down what is causing this runaway memory usage?
Greg
___
Dashboard-hackers mailing list
Dashboard-hackers@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dashboard-hackers
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 18:02 -0400, Joe Shaw wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 17:55 -0400, Gregory Pierce wrote:
> > I am not sure what to look for. I just typed "beagled --debug-memory
> > --allow-backend" and before this I deleted the .beagle directory. Will
> > this restart the indexing
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 17:55 -0400, Gregory Pierce wrote:
> I am not sure what to look for. I just typed "beagled --debug-memory
> --allow-backend" and before this I deleted the .beagle directory. Will
> this restart the indexing process again? And how can I tell whether the
> problem is in F
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 17:38 -0400, Joe Shaw wrote:
> Ok. Can you narrow down the backend which is causing the most memory to
> be used, by using the --allow-backend option? Files and Mail are the
> most likely culprits.
Joe,
I am not sure what to look for. I just typed "beagled --debug-memory
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 15:33 -0400, Gregory Pierce wrote:
> Beagle has been working great. I am very pleased with it overall;
> however, I am concerned about its memory usage. The gnome system monitor
> indicates that it is up to 1.1 GB of memory and that swap space (~1GB)
> is a
Check out the discussion (currently going on) at
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/dashboard-hackers/2005-September/msg00069.html
___
Dashboard-hackers mailing list
Dashboard-hackers@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dashboard-hackers
Hello all,
Beagle has been working great. I am very pleased with it overall;
however, I am concerned about its memory usage. The gnome system monitor
indicates that it is up to 1.1 GB of memory and that swap space (~1GB)
is at 100% usage. Is this normal? I do have a great many files but can
I
Hello,
how do you evaluate the memory?
If I look on my memory consumption it is this:
108000 32848mono-best --debug /.../Best.exe
52124 25048mono-best --debug /../BeagleDaemon.exe --bg
So what does this number means?
108000 means memory including memory mapped data. If you mmap some ver
Hello Everybody
Howdy,
Best is occupying too much memory,
currently 80 MB,
Fresh start, and nothing searched in it, it is sitting in systray,
in my "top" list Mozilla Firefox (is also not a native application) only managed
to exeed best in occupying more memory,
everything else (even Gimp2, Kmail
35 matches
Mail list logo
