> On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:40:47 -0400
> Greg Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uttered:
>
>> Here is some output from top. See how X is using 212M. Way more than
>> it used to. Has anybody else experienced anything like this?
>
> Here's mine.
>
> 1628 root 14 287m 29m 3732 R 1.3 7.9 1:42.01
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:40:47 -0400
Greg Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uttered:
> Hi.
>
> Ever since I updated my XFree packages last week, I have been seeing X
> use massive amounts of memory and I am concerned there may be a memory
> leak or something.
>
> Here is some output from top. See how X i
Hi.
Ever since I updated my XFree packages last week, I have been seeing X use
massive amounts of memory and I am concerned there may be a memory leak or
something.
Here is some output from top. See how X is using 212M. Way more than it used
to. Has anybody else experienced anything like th
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002 22:17:15 -0700
Todd Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said with temporary authority
> James wrote on Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:36:23PM + :
> >
> > 98% of my CPU..
> > The program .. VI yep it had been up for about 2 hours and was
> > slowly consuming all my cpu power.
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002 22:17:15 -0700
Todd Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James wrote on Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:36:23PM + :
> >
> > 98% of my CPU..
> > The program .. VI yep it had been up for about 2 hours and was
> > slowly consuming all my cpu power. Has anyone else notice
James wrote on Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:36:23PM + :
>
> 98% of my CPU..
> The program .. VI yep it had been up for about 2 hours and was
> slowly consuming all my cpu power. Has anyone else noticed this or
> better yet can anyone else duplicate it. I'd like to know if this is a
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 20:52:35 -0700 (PDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (dfox) said with temporary authority
> > The program .. VI yep it had been up for about 2 hours and was
> > slowly consuming all my cpu power. Has anyone else noticed this or
>
> vi? I find that odd. Was it related to the size of th
> The program .. VI yep it had been up for about 2 hours and was
> slowly consuming all my cpu power. Has anyone else noticed this or
vi? I find that odd. Was it related to the size of the file you were
editing?
> James
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to htt
James wrote:
>All,
>
> In my continuing effort to solve other problems on my box I found
>something interesting. for the first time the box had started to
>slow down. Dramatically. So I checked the term window running top and
>sure enough a program that I had running in a tty window was
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 18:38:58 -0400 (EDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said with temporary authority
> On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, James wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> >In my continuing effort to solve other problems on my box I found
> > something interesting. for the first time the box had started
> > to slow
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, James wrote:
> All,
>
>In my continuing effort to solve other problems on my box I found
> something interesting. for the first time the box had started to
> slow down. Dramatically. So I checked the term window running top and
> sure enough a program that I had ru
All,
In my continuing effort to solve other problems on my box I found
something interesting. for the first time the box had started to
slow down. Dramatically. So I checked the term window running top and
sure enough a program that I had running in a tty window was now using
98% of my
--- David Guntner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve
Kieu grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
> >
> > The VM in the kernel 2.4.x has problems this is a
> > _hot_ topic in the LKML; so the kernel in MDK8.1
> >
> > >From my experience I use 2.4.13 and it is quite
> good
The kernel I mentioned is the of
Steve Kieu grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
>
> The VM in the kernel 2.4.x has problems this is a
> _hot_ topic in the LKML; so the kernel in MDK8.1
>
> >From my experience I use 2.4.13 and it is quite good
> in terms of VM management. Try it first.
[davidg@rhpsfan2 davidg]$ rpm -q -a|egrep kernel
The VM in the kernel 2.4.x has problems this is a
_hot_ topic in the LKML; so the kernel in MDK8.1
>From my experience I use 2.4.13 and it is quite good
in terms of VM management. Try it first.
Regard
--- David Guntner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm
running 8.1.
>
> After starting my syste
I'm running 8.1.
After starting my system, I've noted the amount of memory and swap space
being used on a "top" display. After a reboot, there's always 0 swap being
used. I've noticed that the longer the system runs, the more memory
resources show up being used, and the bigger the used swap
Civileme wrote:
>
> I figured I should share this result from the crashtesters.
>
> One of our crashtesters installed Traktopel Beta 2 and was running
> compilation programs.
>
> And his memory was used up... his swap was hit hard... and the system
> informed him it was out of memory and shutt
> Timing chatter on the IDE bus Some DVD-ROMs on VIA chipsets can cause
> corruption of install-time data on hard disks past kernel 2.2.15. WD and
> Maxtor of same speed or a slower WD with a fast Maxtor master will just eat
> your data with timing chatter.
>
> And since WD doesn't do the CR
I figured I should share this result from the crashtesters.
One of our crashtesters installed Traktopel Beta 2 and was running
compilation programs.
And his memory was used up... his swap was hit hard... and the system
informed him it was out of memory and shutting down bash.
Reinstall--same
Hai Vo-Ba wrote:
>
> > Is anyone else experiencing what seems to be a slow memory leak after
> > upgrading from the stock (6.0) XFree rpms to XFree3.3.5?
>
> I have the same problem since upgrading my Kayak XU to Helios this past
> Saturday: X started out at around 13MB and after a coupl
> Is anyone else experiencing what seems to be a slow memory leak after
> upgrading from the stock (6.0) XFree rpms to XFree3.3.5?
I have the same problem since upgrading my Kayak XU to Helios this past
Saturday: X started out at around 13MB and after a couple days has grown
to 143MB.
21 matches
Mail list logo
