what commands show memory usage
When stopping vnet jails get message about lost memory pages. What console commands show available memory pages so I can determine the lost memory pages after 100 stopped jails? Want to find out if that lost memory page message is bogus or not. Thanks ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: what commands show memory usage
On 05/14/2013 08:56 PM, Joe wrote: Tim Daneliuk wrote: On 05/14/2013 08:32 PM, Joe wrote: When stopping vnet jails get message about lost memory pages. What console commands show available memory pages so I can determine the lost memory pages after 100 stopped jails? Want to find out if that lost memory page message is bogus or not. Look at 'vmstat' and 'free' commands. can't find any free command Sorry Joe (and everyone), I had a brief bit flip. The command is actually called freebsd-memory and is not in the base system. It's an addon from Ralph Engelshall and can be found here: http://people.freebsd.org/~rse/utils/ (If you care, the 'free' command is how you do this on Linux.) -- Tim Daneliuk tun...@tundraware.com PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
issue with limiting java's memory usage
hi there, maybe i'm missing something obvious, but i don't quite understand the following top(1) output: last pid: 13875; load averages: 0.73, 0.75, 0.68 65 processes: 2 running, 62 sleeping, 1 waiting CPU 0: 19.5% user, 0.0% nice, 13.3% system, 0.0% interrupt, 67.2% idle CPU 1: 20.3% user, 0.0% nice, 7.8% system, 0.0% interrupt, 71.9% idle Mem: 1365M Active, 185M Inact, 323M Wired, 69M Cache, 213M Buf, 32M Free Swap: 10G Total, 2494M Used, 7746M Free, 24% Inuse, 4K In PIDUIDTHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 6913 1001 32 200 4252M 1312M uwait 0 18.3H 39.06% /usr/local/diablo-jdk1.6.0/bin/java -Xmx512m -jar JDownloade ...how can the size of the resident memory of pid 6913 be 512 megabytes? this is wth a very recent HEAD on amd64. cheers. alex ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: issue with limiting java's memory usage
Le Sun, 29 Jan 2012 19:34:11 +, Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org a écrit : hi there, Hello, maybe i'm missing something obvious, but i don't quite understand the following top(1) output: last pid: 13875; load averages: 0.73, 0.75, 0.68 65 processes: 2 running, 62 sleeping, 1 waiting CPU 0: 19.5% user, 0.0% nice, 13.3% system, 0.0% interrupt, 67.2% idle CPU 1: 20.3% user, 0.0% nice, 7.8% system, 0.0% interrupt, 71.9% idle Mem: 1365M Active, 185M Inact, 323M Wired, 69M Cache, 213M Buf, 32M Free Swap: 10G Total, 2494M Used, 7746M Free, 24% Inuse, 4K In PIDUIDTHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 6913 1001 32 200 4252M 1312M uwait 0 18.3H 39.06% /usr/local/diablo-jdk1.6.0/bin/java -Xmx512m -jar JDownloade ...how can the size of the resident memory of pid 6913 be 512 megabytes? I don't know but you can inspect the java application with the java console (jconsole). There are several stats on memory usage. With JDownloader (doing nothing), I see 57 MB of non heap memory usage, and only 30 MB of heap memory. Regards. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: issue with limiting java's memory usage
On Sun Jan 29 12, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote: Le Sun, 29 Jan 2012 19:34:11 +, Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org a écrit : hi there, Hello, maybe i'm missing something obvious, but i don't quite understand the following top(1) output: last pid: 13875; load averages: 0.73, 0.75, 0.68 65 processes: 2 running, 62 sleeping, 1 waiting CPU 0: 19.5% user, 0.0% nice, 13.3% system, 0.0% interrupt, 67.2% idle CPU 1: 20.3% user, 0.0% nice, 7.8% system, 0.0% interrupt, 71.9% idle Mem: 1365M Active, 185M Inact, 323M Wired, 69M Cache, 213M Buf, 32M Free Swap: 10G Total, 2494M Used, 7746M Free, 24% Inuse, 4K In PIDUIDTHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 6913 1001 32 200 4252M 1312M uwait 0 18.3H 39.06% /usr/local/diablo-jdk1.6.0/bin/java -Xmx512m -jar JDownloade ...how can the size of the resident memory of pid 6913 be 512 megabytes? I don't know but you can inspect the java application with the java console (jconsole). There are several stats on memory usage. jconsole doesn't seem to work for me. all i get is a blank white X window. :( cheers. alex With JDownloader (doing nothing), I see 57 MB of non heap memory usage, and only 30 MB of heap memory. Regards. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? In vain of 'free' in Linux. I know you can check the values with sysctl, I was just checking if anyone has a cleaner option. I was always curious. Thanks Jon ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
On 11/3/11 9:18 PM, Jon Schipp wrote: Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? Hi Jon, Check out the port /usr/ports/sysutils/sysinfo . HTH ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Rares Aioanei bsdlis...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/03/2011 03:18 PM, Jon Schipp wrote: Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? In vain of 'free' in Linux. I know you can check the values with sysctl, I was just checking if anyone has a cleaner option. I was always curious. Thanks Jon __**_ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/**mailman/listinfo/freebsd-**questionshttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-** unsubscr...@freebsd.org freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org top? Crap, I forgot mention that it needs to be non-interactive, it will be for e-mail alerts. So that rules out top as for as I know. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:06:19 -0400 Jon Schipp jonsch...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Rares Aioanei bsdlis...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/03/2011 03:18 PM, Jon Schipp wrote: Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? In vain of 'free' in Linux. I know you can check the values with sysctl, I was just checking if anyone has a cleaner option. I was always curious. Thanks Jon __**_ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/**mailman/listinfo/freebsd-**questionshttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-** unsubscr...@freebsd.org freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org top? Crap, I forgot mention that it needs to be non-interactive, it will be for e-mail alerts. So that rules out top as for as I know. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org top -n 1 followed by grep or awk might do what you want. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
Hello Jon, Perhaps the port sysutils/freecolor. Cheers ... Mark Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? In vain of 'free' in Linux. I know you can check the values with sysctl, I was just checking if anyone has a cleaner option. I was always curious. Thanks Jon ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
Jon Schipp jonsch...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Rares Aioanei bsdlis...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/03/2011 03:18 PM, Jon Schipp wrote: Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? In vain of 'free' in Linux. I know you can check the values with sysctl, I was just checking if anyone has a cleaner option. I was always curious. Thanks Jon __**_ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/**mailman/listinfo/freebsd-**questionshttp://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-** unsubscr...@freebsd.org freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org top? Crap, I forgot mention that it needs to be non-interactive, it will be for e-mail alerts. So that rules out top as for as I know. No, you could script it out of top(1), but I'm going to guess that you're trying to be warned when the system is close to running out of memory. That is silly -- you paid for the memory; why would you *want* it to sit around doing nothing? Also note that the definition of free is somewhat complicated. Maybe if you described the actual problem you want to solve, we could suggest a more appropriate answer. A literal answer to your question might be: top -d 1|grep '^Mem:'|cut -d ',' -f 6 assuming the format of the line of top doesn't change. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.comwrote: From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Thu Nov 3 08:17:46 2011 Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 09:18:06 -0400 From: Jon Schipp jonsch...@gmail.com To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? In vain of 'free' in Linux. Having *NO* idea what linux 'free' does, your question is hard to answer. I know you can check the values with sysctl, I was just checking if anyone has a cleaner option. I was always curious. If you're just looking for the amount of 'free' memory, the 3rd field of the third line of the output of vmstat(8) has that value. I'm under the impression that virtual memory and physical memory usage are very different. e.g. vmstat and top report very different memory values. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Lowell Gilbert freebsd-questions-lo...@be-well.ilk.org wrote: Jon Schipp jonsch...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Rares Aioanei bsdlis...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/03/2011 03:18 PM, Jon Schipp wrote: Is there a program to check physical memory usage in FreeBSD(using 8.2 RELEASE)? In vain of 'free' in Linux. I know you can check the values with sysctl, I was just checking if anyone has a cleaner option. I was always curious. Thanks Jon __**_ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/**mailman/listinfo/freebsd-**questions http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-** unsubscr...@freebsd.org freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org top? Crap, I forgot mention that it needs to be non-interactive, it will be for e-mail alerts. So that rules out top as for as I know. No, you could script it out of top(1), but I'm going to guess that you're trying to be warned when the system is close to running out of memory. That is silly -- you paid for the memory; why would you *want* it to sit around doing nothing? While this isn't my intention... I'm curious: You wouldn't want to know when your machine has reached periods of high memory utilization? Occurrence/frequency information seems pretty valuable. More importantly, at specific times, noticing patterns, use during/after business hours If you didn't want to use memory, it wouldn't be purchased. I don't think keeping track of the utility of your purchases is silly. Also note that the definition of free is somewhat complicated. Maybe if you described the actual problem you want to solve, we could suggest a more appropriate answer. A literal answer to your question might be: top -d 1|grep '^Mem:'|cut -d ',' -f 6 assuming the format of the line of top doesn't change. That does the trick. I didn't think it was possible to grab data from interactive programs without throwing in some garbage. Should've tested. Thanks ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Jon Schipp jonsch...@gmail.com wrote: I'm under the impression that virtual memory and physical memory usage are very different. e.g. vmstat and top report very different memory values. If I assume this is an XY problem, and your true goal is find out what memory pressure a system is under then my answer would be to track the percent of swap used. Free memory is a useful utility on Windows XP, not so much on FreeBSD. So to answer your question in another way, there is a reason free doesn't exist on FreeBSD. It's not very meaningful. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Check Memory Usage, program like 'free' in Linux
Jon Schipp jonsch...@gmail.com writes: You wouldn't want to know when your machine has reached periods of high memory utilization? No, I want to know when my machine would perform better if it had more memory. Keeping memory in use when it otherwise would be free means I get *better* performance. Occurrence/frequency information seems pretty valuable. More importantly, at specific times, noticing patterns, use during/after business hours If you didn't want to use memory, it wouldn't be purchased. I don't think keeping track of the utility of your purchases is silly. That makes sense, but the amount of free memory does not tell you any of what you're saying you want to track. Please start by reading the FAQ question titled Why does top show very little free memory even when I have very few programs running?. That does the trick. I didn't think it was possible to grab data from interactive programs without throwing in some garbage. Technically, top(1) isn't an interactive program at all if you send its output to a pipe. It still could use terminal features, but it doesn't. This is described within the first 25 lines of its manual. In fact, I notice that the '-d 1' option (that I put in my suggestion) is redundant. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: top memory usage question
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Coert lgro...@waagmeester.co.za wrote: Hello all, Just a question, on Linux the output of top's memory usage looks like this: Mem: 2075424k total, 1760848k used, 314576k free, 151872k buffers Swap: 4192924k total, 0k used, 4192924k free, 1214052k cached on FreeBSD: Mem: 48M Active, 945M Inact, 190M Wired, 112M Buf, 804M Free Swap: 4063M Total, 4063M Free I have looked at the respective man pages, and googled. Where can I find out what Active, Inactive, and Wired mean? The differences have to do with the way memory is managed. Active memory is currently is RAM and is being used by a currently running process. Inactive is in RAM but is not currently being used. Wired means that the page is locked into ram and won't be paged out. Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paging and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_memory for more info -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
top memory usage question
Hello all, Just a question, on Linux the output of top's memory usage looks like this: Mem: 2075424k total, 1760848k used, 314576k free, 151872k buffers Swap: 4192924k total,0k used, 4192924k free, 1214052k cached on FreeBSD: Mem: 48M Active, 945M Inact, 190M Wired, 112M Buf, 804M Free Swap: 4063M Total, 4063M Free I have looked at the respective man pages, and googled. Where can I find out what Active, Inactive, and Wired mean? Thank you, Coert ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: top memory usage question
On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:52:15 +0200 Coert lgro...@waagmeester.co.za wrote: Hello all, Just a question, on Linux the output of top's memory usage looks like this: Mem: 2075424k total, 1760848k used, 314576k free, 151872k buffers Swap: 4192924k total,0k used, 4192924k free, 1214052k cached on FreeBSD: Mem: 48M Active, 945M Inact, 190M Wired, 112M Buf, 804M Free Swap: 4063M Total, 4063M Free This is missing Cache I have looked at the respective man pages, and googled. Where can I find out what Active, Inactive, and Wired mean? Active, Inact, Cache , and Free are all part of the same VM lifecycle. When the system need to allocate memory it comes from cache or free. Wired memory wont be paged-out. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: API to find the memory usage of a process.
On Thursday 18 March 2010 18:28:48 Jayadev Kumar wrote: Hi, I need to find the memory usage of a process, from inside the process. Is there any system call do this ? I was trying to find it from 'top' utility source code. I couldn't find the port which it is coming from yet. Thanks, Jayadev. Check out getrusage(2). - Pieter ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
API to find the memory usage of a process.
Hi, I need to find the memory usage of a process, from inside the process. Is there any system call do this ? I was trying to find it from 'top' utility source code. I couldn't find the port which it is coming from yet. Thanks, Jayadev. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: API to find the memory usage of a process.
On 03/18/10 10:28, Jayadev Kumar wrote: Hi, I need to find the memory usage of a process, from inside the process. Is there any system call do this ? I was trying to find it from 'top' utility source code. I couldn't find the port which it is coming from yet. Thanks, Jayadev. the source for top is located in /usr/src/usr.bin/top ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: API to find the memory usage of a process.
On Thu 18 Mar 2010 at 18:30:00 PDT J. Johnston wrote: On 03/18/10 10:28, Jayadev Kumar wrote: Hi, I need to find the memory usage of a process, from inside the process. Is there any system call do this ? I was trying to find it from 'top' utility source code. I couldn't find the port which it is coming from yet. Thanks, Jayadev. the source for top is located in /usr/src/usr.bin/top whereis -sq foo will get you the source directory for foo, assuming you installed the system sources, or if foo is also the name of the port. If foo was installed by a port with some other name, you can find it with pkg_info -W foo ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Looking for a convenient way in C to retrieve CPU and memory usage of a process
Manish Jain wrote: I am looking for a convenient way using C to retrieve the current CPU and memory utilization of a process of which I have the pid. Can somebody please give me a hint of which system-calls/library-functions to use for this ? I don't want to use the system() function or grep for information via the /proc filesystem. I would be grateful if you could also please mention whether the suggested method[s] is/are FreeBSD-specific or would be portable to other environments like Solaris/Linux ? Use the source, Luke. In this cse, probably a very good place to start is with top(1) since it already does a lot of what you want. Start with /usr/src/contrib/top/ This sort of thing generally requires reading /dev/kmem, which is very OS dependent. The same sort of approach will probably work on most Unix-oid OSes, but the details will be significantly different. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Looking for a convenient way in C to retrieve CPU and memory usage of a process
I am looking for a convenient way using C to retrieve the current CPU and memory utilization of a process of which I have the pid. Can somebody please give me a hint of which system-calls/library-functions to use for this ? I don't want to use the system() function or grep for information via the /proc filesystem. I would be grateful if you could also please mention whether the suggested method[s] is/are FreeBSD-specific or would be portable to other environments like Solaris/Linux ? Hmm. Portable, no /proc... ? It could be tough to do this generically. Why not look at unixtop, which tries to be portable?: http://sourceforge.net/projects/unixtop/files/ I think on FreeBSD it resorts to using kvm(3). You could just call that directly. Also, coming soon on FreeBSD, there will be libprocstat, which aims at making this easier: http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/projects/libprocstat/ stas@ is working on that. This kind of question is best suited for freebsd-hackers@ . Regards, b. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Looking for a convenient way in C to retrieve CPU and memory usage of a process
Hello, I am looking for a convenient way using C to retrieve the current CPU and memory utilization of a process of which I have the pid. Can somebody please give me a hint of which system-calls/library-functions to use for this ? I don't want to use the system() function or grep for information via the /proc filesystem. I would be grateful if you could also please mention whether the suggested method[s] is/are FreeBSD-specific or would be portable to other environments like Solaris/Linux ? Thanks for any help. Regards Happy New Year Manish Jain invalid.poin...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 01), Bill Moran said: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. ps will sort by memory usage when given the -m flag. Also check ipcs -a to see if there are any sysv shared memory segments hanging arnound. If you don't see anything using the memory, where are you seeing that something is using it? ...and here is top output after I stopped Postfix, slapd and Cyrus-IMAP. Still over 3G Active. snip You did not sort by res and there are only 40 processes showing, which means your output is truncated and may have truncated the problematic process. Please use top -o res to get the output sorted by memory usage, or don't truncate the output (former preferred). Also, please provide the output of ipcs -a -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
Bill Moran wrote: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 01), Bill Moran said: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. ps will sort by memory usage when given the -m flag. Also check ipcs -a to see if there are any sysv shared memory segments hanging arnound. If you don't see anything using the memory, where are you seeing that something is using it? ...and here is top output after I stopped Postfix, slapd and Cyrus-IMAP. Still over 3G Active. snip You did not sort by res and there are only 40 processes showing, which means your output is truncated and may have truncated the problematic process. Please use top -o res to get the output sorted by memory usage, or don't truncate the output (former preferred). Also, please provide the output of ipcs -a There was no more processes... ipcs -a Message Queues: T ID KEY MODEOWNERGROUPCREATOR CGROUP CBYTES QNUM QBYTES LSPIDLRPID STIMERTIMECTIME Shared Memory: T ID KEY MODEOWNERGROUPCREATOR CGROUP NATTCHSEGSZ CPID LPID ATIME DTIMECTIME Semaphores: T ID KEY MODEOWNERGROUPCREATOR CGROUP NSEMS OTIMECTIME ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: Bill Moran wrote: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 01), Bill Moran said: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. ps will sort by memory usage when given the -m flag. Also check ipcs -a to see if there are any sysv shared memory segments hanging arnound. If you don't see anything using the memory, where are you seeing that something is using it? ...and here is top output after I stopped Postfix, slapd and Cyrus-IMAP. Still over 3G Active. snip You did not sort by res and there are only 40 processes showing, which means your output is truncated and may have truncated the problematic process. Please use top -o res to get the output sorted by memory usage, or don't truncate the output (former preferred). Also, please provide the output of ipcs -a There was no more processes... From your top output: 45 processes: 1 running, 44 sleeping There were 40 processes listed, so there were 5 not shown. ipcs -a OK, this verifies that nothing is tied up in shared memory. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
On Tuesday 01 September 2009 23:19:23 Michael David Crawford wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Well, my problem is that if I add up all I *can* see in top or ps it never gets near the by now 3G plus memory shown as Active. Maybe one gig is accounted for, I'm not that familiar with FreeBSD yet, but the kernel uses memory which might not be charged against any process. For example, to map some virtual memory requires memory to store the mappings in. Open files have kernel structures, as do filesystems. If top or ps were only to show userspace memory allocations, then you're right, a lot of memory would be unaccounted for. It doesn't for the Active to Free states. For individual processes, everything is shown that the process allocates. So for a file descriptor, an int would be allocated, where the kernel holds the real info. This is one cause for filled Active memory: a process polling multiple file descriptors, like a File Alteration Monitor under current desktops. The other, as Dan Nelson described, is file cache. If you want to be sure it's this, then reboot the machine and run: /etc/periodic/security/100.chksetuid You should see memory usage going up. If this causes a performance problem (i.e. You sometimes are subject to heavily increasing loads on a mailserver, that causes a lot of forks and file cache memory isn't unloaded fast enough), then you should either disable the security check or properly seperate data from binaries using partitions and mount data partitions with nosuid/noexec, so that these are omitted from the daily checks. -- Mel ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
Mel Flynn wrote: On Tuesday 01 September 2009 23:19:23 Michael David Crawford wrote: Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Well, my problem is that if I add up all I *can* see in top or ps it never gets near the by now 3G plus memory shown as Active. Maybe one gig is accounted for, I'm not that familiar with FreeBSD yet, but the kernel uses memory which might not be charged against any process. For example, to map some virtual memory requires memory to store the mappings in. Open files have kernel structures, as do filesystems. If top or ps were only to show userspace memory allocations, then you're right, a lot of memory would be unaccounted for. It doesn't for the Active to Free states. For individual processes, everything is shown that the process allocates. So for a file descriptor, an int would be allocated, where the kernel holds the real info. This is one cause for filled Active memory: a process polling multiple file descriptors, like a File Alteration Monitor under current desktops. The other, as Dan Nelson described, is file cache. If you want to be sure it's this, then reboot the machine and run: /etc/periodic/security/100.chksetuid You should see memory usage going up. If this causes a performance problem (i.e. You sometimes are subject to heavily increasing loads on a mailserver, that causes a lot of forks and file cache memory isn't unloaded fast enough), then you should either disable the security check or properly seperate data from binaries using partitions and mount data partitions with nosuid/noexec, so that these are omitted from the daily checks. Thank you all for the informative answers, helped a lot to understand better what is going on. I cannot run 100.chksetuid on a production server but I will definitely do it on the testing one. Cheers, -- per ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
memory usage displsy
Hello, What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? Thanks, ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
In the last episode (Sep 01), Bill Moran said: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. ps will sort by memory usage when given the -m flag. Also check ipcs -a to see if there are any sysv shared memory segments hanging arnound. If you don't see anything using the memory, where are you seeing that something is using it? -- Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
Per olof Ljungmark wrote: Well, my problem is that if I add up all I *can* see in top or ps it never gets near the by now 3G plus memory shown as Active. Maybe one gig is accounted for, I'm not that familiar with FreeBSD yet, but the kernel uses memory which might not be charged against any process. For example, to map some virtual memory requires memory to store the mappings in. Open files have kernel structures, as do filesystems. If top or ps were only to show userspace memory allocations, then you're right, a lot of memory would be unaccounted for. Mike -- Michael David Crawford m...@prgmr.com prgmr.com - We Don't Assume You Are Stupid. Xen-Powered Virtual Private Servers: http://prgmr.com/xen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
Bill Moran wrote: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. Well, my problem is that if I add up all I *can* see in top or ps it never gets near the by now 3G plus memory shown as Active. Maybe one gig is accounted for, ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 01), Bill Moran said: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. ps will sort by memory usage when given the -m flag. Also check ipcs -a to see if there are any sysv shared memory segments hanging arnound. If you don't see anything using the memory, where are you seeing that something is using it? What I see is a slapd process using about 150M, then around a hundred imap processes 5-10M each. If the server is restarted, 70-80% will be free, now, after three months we're at 11% free loosing about 20% per month. The exact sum VSZ right now as shown by ps is 1073632k but top says Mem: 3111M Active, 311M Inact, 230M Wired, 144M Cache, 112M Buf, 27M Free Clearly something is grabbing memory and not releasing it. Stopping and starting various programs makes very little difference. No SYSV mem at all. Thanks, ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 01), Bill Moran said: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. ps will sort by memory usage when given the -m flag. Also check ipcs -a to see if there are any sysv shared memory segments hanging arnound. If you don't see anything using the memory, where are you seeing that something is using it? ...and here is top output after I stopped Postfix, slapd and Cyrus-IMAP. Still over 3G Active. last pid: 10278; load averages: 0.03, 0.02, 0.00 up 93+02:50:16 01:57:35 45 processes: 1 running, 44 sleeping CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% idle Mem: 3057M Active, 312M Inact, 228M Wired, 144M Cache, 112M Buf, 81M Free Swap: 4096M Total, 80K Used, 4096M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATETIME WCPU COMMAND 647 root4 200 3372K 1508K kserel 110:35 0.00% apcupsd 831 root3 200 5008K 1920K kserel 58:48 0.00% bacula-fd 480 root1 960 1416K 932K select 25:23 0.00% syslogd 596 bind1 40 6400K 5160K kqread 23:05 0.00% named 709 root1 960 2780K 1484K select 4:26 0.00% ntpd 661 root1 40 3372K 1972K accept 0:53 0.00% saslauthd 660 root1 200 3372K 1972K lockf0:53 0.00% saslauthd 662 root1 200 3372K 1972K lockf0:53 0.00% saslauthd 659 root1 200 3372K 1972K lockf0:53 0.00% saslauthd 657 root1 200 3372K 1972K lockf0:52 0.00% saslauthd 913 root1 80 1412K 900K nanslp 0:22 0.00% cron 91648 peo 1 960 11372K 7572K select 0:04 0.00% sshd 3419 nagios 1 960 1380K 960K select 0:01 0.00% nrpe2 91656 root1 200 3880K 1952K pause0:00 0.00% csh 10243 root1 960 2516K 1604K RUN 0:00 0.00% top 95511 root1 50 4120K 2156K ttyin0:00 0.00% csh 95504 peo 1 960 6296K 2544K select 0:00 0.00% sshd 95502 root1 40 6300K 2540K sbwait 0:00 0.00% sshd 91646 root1 40 6300K 2476K sbwait 0:00 0.00% sshd 10223 root1 40 6300K 2660K sbwait 0:00 0.00% sshd 10232 root1 50 3880K 2044K ttyin0:00 0.00% csh 91650 peo 1 200 3836K 1848K pause0:00 0.00% csh 95506 peo 1 200 3940K 1916K pause0:00 0.00% csh 10227 peo 1 200 3836K 1976K pause0:00 0.00% csh 906 root1 960 3552K 2016K select 0:00 0.00% sshd 10225 peo 1 960 6296K 2664K select 0:00 0.00% sshd 429 root1 960 528K 284K select 0:00 0.00% devd 91654 peo 1 80 1804K 1112K wait 0:00 0.00% su 95510 peo 1 80 1804K 1168K wait 0:00 0.00% su 10231 peo 1 80 1804K 1244K wait 0:00 0.00% su 961 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 962 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 968 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 964 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 966 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 963 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 965 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 967 root1 50 1352K 784K ttyin0:00 0.00% getty 943 root1 1110 1444K 840K select 0:00 0.00% inetd 138 root1 200 1260K 636K pause0:00 0.00% adjkerntz ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: memory usage displsy
In the last episode (Sep 02), Per olof Ljungmark said: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 01), Bill Moran said: In response to Per olof Ljungmark p...@intersonic.se: What is a good way to find out how memory is used? Have a 6.4 box where memory is used by something but I fail to see what is using it - tried different switches to ps(1), tried the stat tools but a big chunk of memory does not show at all. A proper tool for analyzing memory usage live, this is a production box? I've always been able to get what I need from top. You can do -o res to sort by resident memory usage, which helps. ps will sort by memory usage when given the -m flag. Also check ipcs -a to see if there are any sysv shared memory segments hanging arnound. If you don't see anything using the memory, where are you seeing that something is using it? What I see is a slapd process using about 150M, then around a hundred imap processes 5-10M each. If the server is restarted, 70-80% will be free, now, after three months we're at 11% free loosing about 20% per month. The exact sum VSZ right now as shown by ps is 1073632k but top says Mem: 3111M Active, 311M Inact, 230M Wired, 144M Cache, 112M Buf, 27M Free Clearly something is grabbing memory and not releasing it. Disk cache, most likely. I would expect Free memory as reported by top to drop down to under 100MB a few hours after a system is rebooted. The difference between Active-Inact-Cache-Buf is more an indication of how long ago a particular page has been touched (and how much work it is to map the page back into a processes memory space), and doesn't really say what the block is being used for. If you are not actively swapping, there is no need for panic. Even a couple hundred MB of used swap is fine, as long as you're not constantly having to pull it back into memory. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/arch-handbook/vm.html has a good rundown of how the VM system works. -- Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Memory Usage
Le Fri, 2 Jan 2009 10:47:32 -0500, Grant Peel gp...@thenetnow.com a écrit : Hi all, Does anyone have scripts they may be willing to share the parses any FreeBSD utility (top, w, etc) suitable for using the output to use mrtg to show memory and disk usage? Mrtg needs a script that returns four lines : - the first value - the second value (return 0 if only one value is used) - the Uptime - The legend By example a little script to return the number of processus using ps -xa net:/1local/libexec/mrtg# ./pn2mrtg 193 0 12 days, 10:20 net see http://user.lamaiziere.net/patrick/mrtg.tar.gz as examples. (The scripts are quite uggly...) http://lamaiziere.net/private/stat/net/ for the result OTH, regards. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Memory Usage
Grant Peel skrev: Hi all, Does anyone have scripts they may be willing to share the parses any FreeBSD utility (top, w, etc) suitable for using the output to use mrtg to show memory and disk usage? -Grant ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.2/1871 - Release Date: 2009-01-01 17:01 I used to use mrtg but ever since Cacti came along I've been using that instead. Cacti is excellent. It's in ports. /R ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Memory Usage
Hi all, Does anyone have scripts they may be willing to share the parses any FreeBSD utility (top, w, etc) suitable for using the output to use mrtg to show memory and disk usage? -Grant ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Memory Usage
Grant Peel wrote: Does anyone have scripts they may be willing to share the parses any FreeBSD utility (top, w, etc) suitable for using the output to use mrtg to show memory and disk usage? net-mgmt/net-snmpd ? Or even, perhaps the base system's bsnmpd (although I'm not sure if this has support for all the OIDs you'ld need to query yet)? I don't know about mrtg, but snmpd+cacti lets me graph the sort of parameters you're interested in pretty simply. I believe mrtg normally does snmp queries to get interface stats -- it shouldn't be too hard to persuade it to make the equivalent queries to get disk or memory usage stats. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bash script to find out the summary of user memory usage [not working]
I have correction with the script but still doesn't work:
#!/usr/local/bin/bash
for user in `ps -A -o user | sort | uniq | tail +2`
do
echo user: $user
ps aux -U $user | tail +2 | while read line
do
mem=`echo $line | awk {'print $4'}`
echo mem: $mem
TMPSUMMEM=`awk -v x=$mem -v y=$TMPSUMMEM 'BEGIN{printf
%.2f\n,x+y}'`
echo summem: $TMPSUMMEM
done
echo finalsummem: $SUMMEM
export SUMMEM=$TMPSUMMEM
done
echo finalsummem: $SUMMEM
#!/usr/local/bin/bash
for user in `ps -A -o user | sort | uniq | tail +2`
do
echo user: $user
ps aux -U $user | tail +2 | while read line
do
mem=`echo $line | awk {'print $4'}`
echo mem: $mem
TMPSUMMEM=`awk -v x=$mem -v y=$TMPSUMMEM 'BEGIN{printf
%.2f\n,x+y}'`
echo summem: $TMPSUMMEM
done
echo finalsummem: $TMPSUMMEM
--- Patrick Dung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, any idea about why below script is not working?
The final sum is empty..
#!/usr/local/bin/bash
for user in `ps -A -o user | sort | uniq | tail +2`
do
echo user: $user
ps aux -U $user | tail +2 | while read line
do
mem=`echo $line | awk {'print $4'}`
echo mem: $mem
TMPSUMMEM=`awk -v x=$mem -v y=$TMPSUMMEM 'BEGIN{printf
%.2f\n,x+y}'`
echo summem: $TMPSUMMEM
done
echo finalsummem: $SUMMEM
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bash script to find out the summary of user memory usage [not working]
On 2007-12-17 06:00, Patrick Dung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have correction with the script but still doesn't work:
#!/usr/local/bin/bash
for user in `ps -A -o user | sort | uniq | tail +2`
do
echo user: $user
ps aux -U $user | tail +2 | while read line
do
mem=`echo $line | awk {'print $4'}`
echo mem: $mem
TMPSUMMEM=`awk -v x=$mem -v y=$TMPSUMMEM 'BEGIN{printf
%.2f\n,x+y}'`
echo summem: $TMPSUMMEM
done
echo finalsummem: $SUMMEM
export SUMMEM=$TMPSUMMEM
done
echo finalsummem: $SUMMEM
There are *many* race conditions in that script. For example, there's
no guarantee that once you get a snapshot of the ps -A -o user output,
then the same users will be listed in the loop you are running for each
username.
The script is also a bit 'sub-optimal' because it calls ps(1) and parses
its output many times (at least as many times as there are users). A
much better way to `design' something like this would be to keep a hash
of the usernames, and keep incrementing the hash entry for each user as
you hit ps(1) output lines.
I'm not going to even bother writing a script to use a hash in bash(1),
because there are much better languages to work with hashes,
dictionaries or even simple arrays.
Here's for example a Python script which does what I described:
1 #!/usr/bin/env python
2
3 import os
4 import re
5 import sys
6
7 try:
8 input = os.popen('ps xauwww', 'r')
9 except:
10 print Cannot open pipe for ps(1) output
11 sys.exit(1)
12
13 # Start with an empty dictionary.
14 stats = {}
15
16 # Regexp to strip the ps(1) output header.
17 header = re.compile('USER')
18
19 for line in input.readlines():
20 if header.match(line):
21 continue
22 fields = line.split()
23 if not fields or len(fields) 4:
24 continue
25
26 (username, mem) = (fields[0], float(fields[3]))
27 value = None
28 try:
29 value = stats[username]
30 except KeyError:
31 pass
32
33 if not value:
34 stats[username] = 0.0
35 stats[username] += mem
36
37 # Print all the stats we have collected so far.
38 keys = stats.keys()
39 if len(keys) 0:
40 total = 0.0
41 print %-15s %5s % ('USERNAME', 'MEM%')
42 for k in stats.keys():
43 print %-15s %5.2f % (k, stats[k])
44 total += stats[k]
45 # Finally print a grand total of all users.
46 print %-15s %5.2f % ('TOTAL', total)
It's not the shortest Python script one could write to do what you
describe, but I've gone for readability rather than speed or
conciseness.
Running this script should produce:
$ ./foo.py
USERNAME MEM%
_pflogd 0.10
daemon 0.00
bind 1.10
_dhcp0.10
keramida38.60
smmsp0.10
root10.10
build0.00
TOTAL 50.10
$
PS: Yes, you could probably do the same in bash, with sed, awk and a bit
of superglue, but I prefer Perl and/or Python for anything which
involves something a bit more involved than simple string substitution
these days...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bash script to find out the summary of user memory usage [not working]
Hello, any idea about why below script is not working?
The final sum is empty..
#!/usr/local/bin/bash
for user in `ps -A -o user | sort | uniq | tail +2`
do
echo user: $user
ps aux -U $user | tail +2 | while read line
do
mem=`echo $line | awk {'print $4'}`
echo mem: $mem
TMPSUMMEM=`awk -v x=$mem -v y=$TMPSUMMEM 'BEGIN{printf
%.2f\n,x+y}'`
echo summem: $TMPSUMMEM
done
echo finalsummem: $SUMMEM
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Understanding top and memory usage
Hi All, This is a question which probably applies to all unix based OS as well as FreeBSD. When using the top command I get the following in regards to memory usage. Mem: 223M Active, 970M Inact, 175M Wired, 50M Cache, 112M Buf, 73M Free Swap: 3029M Total, 12K Used, 3029M Free Can someone advise me which figure relates to actual physical memory which is available. I can't work out if it is the 970M Inact or the 73M Free (i.e. the last figure). Any advise greatfully received. Thanks Regards Phil. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Understanding top and memory usage
Philip Radford wrote: [ ... ] When using the top command I get the following in regards to memory usage. Mem: 223M Active, 970M Inact, 175M Wired, 50M Cache, 112M Buf, 73M Free Swap: 3029M Total, 12K Used, 3029M Free Can someone advise me which figure relates to actual physical memory which is available. I can't work out if it is the 970M Inact or the 73M Free (i.e. the last figure). The 73MB free is the amount of completely unused physical RAM available, but the system can use memory from the 970MB of inactive if needed to run new programs, otherwise that serves as a cache of already-accessed process and file data. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Memory usage for MySQL
From what I read you should only change kern.maxdsiz, changing kern.dfldsiz makes every process allocating this amount of memory by default, thats bad. Something like: kern.maxdsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB #kern.dfldsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB #kern.maxssiz=134217728 # 128MB would do the trick for you, check limits also and see what the init scripts may be limiting on this process. HTH, DS Thaddeus Quintin wrote: I'm working on a FreeBSD 6.1 machine and setting up MySQL 5.0 with some InnoDB tables. The machine has 2GB of RAM and will primarily be used as a database machine and will also be serving files over NFS (not high volume). The issue that I'm having is that when I start up MySQL I get a couple Out of Memory errors before it actually starts up. Looks like this- 060719 11:55:35 InnoDB: Started; log sequence number 0 43656 /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: Out of memory (Needed 950109184 bytes) /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: Out of memory (Needed 712581120 bytes) 060719 11:55:35 [Note] /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: ready for connections. Version: '5.0.22-log' socket: '/tmp/mysql.sock' port: 3306 If I reduce or increase the innodb_buffer_pool_size variable for MySQL I can eliminate or increase the number of errors. This set of errors was with innodb_buffer_pool_size set to 600M This is what top currently shows for MySQL- PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 871 mysql 8 200 1196M 159M kserel 0 0:01 0.00% mysqld I tweaked /boot/loader.conf to allow larger data size for processes already (rebooted after changes)- kern.maxdsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.dfldsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.maxssiz=134217728 # 128MB If there's an out of memory error, how come MySQL starts up? Is this something to be concerned about? What else should I be checking to figure this out? Thanks- Thaddeus ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Memory usage for MySQL
I'm working on a FreeBSD 6.1 machine and setting up MySQL 5.0 with some InnoDB tables. The machine has 2GB of RAM and will primarily be used as a database machine and will also be serving files over NFS (not high volume). The issue that I'm having is that when I start up MySQL I get a couple Out of Memory errors before it actually starts up. Looks like this- 060719 11:55:35 InnoDB: Started; log sequence number 0 43656 /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: Out of memory (Needed 950109184 bytes) /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: Out of memory (Needed 712581120 bytes) 060719 11:55:35 [Note] /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: ready for connections. Version: '5.0.22-log' socket: '/tmp/mysql.sock' port: 3306 If I reduce or increase the innodb_buffer_pool_size variable for MySQL I can eliminate or increase the number of errors. This set of errors was with innodb_buffer_pool_size set to 600M This is what top currently shows for MySQL- PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 871 mysql 8 200 1196M 159M kserel 0 0:01 0.00% mysqld I tweaked /boot/loader.conf to allow larger data size for processes already (rebooted after changes)- kern.maxdsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.dfldsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.maxssiz=134217728 # 128MB If there's an out of memory error, how come MySQL starts up? Is this something to be concerned about? What else should I be checking to figure this out? Thanks- Thaddeus ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Memory usage for MySQL
On Jul 19, 2006, at 1:14 PM, Thaddeus Quintin wrote: The issue that I'm having is that when I start up MySQL I get a couple Out of Memory errors before it actually starts up. Looks like this- 060719 11:55:35 InnoDB: Started; log sequence number 0 43656 /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: Out of memory (Needed 950109184 bytes) /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: Out of memory (Needed 712581120 bytes) 060719 11:55:35 [Note] /usr/local/libexec/mysqld: ready for connections. Version: '5.0.22-log' socket: '/tmp/mysql.sock' port: 3306 FreeBSD defaults to having a 512MB maximum process datasize. Add something like: kern.dfldsiz=1G ...to /boot/loader.conf. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Memory usage for MySQL
On Jul 19, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Charles Swiger wrote: FreeBSD defaults to having a 512MB maximum process datasize. Add something like: kern.dfldsiz=1G ...to /boot/loader.conf. I already took care of that, it was in my first email- I tweaked /boot/loader.conf to allow larger data size for processes already (rebooted after changes)- kern.maxdsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.dfldsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.maxssiz=134217728 # 128MB From what I read, that should do it, but I still get those start up errors before MySQL decides to run. Maybe it has something to do with how quickly MySQL is asking for memory? Thaddeus ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Memory usage for MySQL
On Jul 19, 2006, at 2:31 PM, Thaddeus Quintin wrote: I already took care of that, it was in my first email- I tweaked /boot/loader.conf to allow larger data size for processes already (rebooted after changes)- kern.maxdsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.dfldsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.maxssiz=134217728 # 128MB From what I read, that should do it, but I still get those start up errors before MySQL decides to run. Maybe it has something to do with how quickly MySQL is asking for memory? Or maybe it's trying to ask for a big shared memory segment...? -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Memory usage for MySQL
On Jul 19, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Charles Swiger wrote: On Jul 19, 2006, at 2:31 PM, Thaddeus Quintin wrote: I already took care of that, it was in my first email- I tweaked /boot/loader.conf to allow larger data size for processes already (rebooted after changes)- kern.maxdsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.dfldsiz=1395864371 # 1.3GB kern.maxssiz=134217728 # 128MB From what I read, that should do it, but I still get those start up errors before MySQL decides to run. Maybe it has something to do with how quickly MySQL is asking for memory? Or maybe it's trying to ask for a big shared memory segment...? Your guess is as good as mine. Are there tools or anything else I can use to try and figure this out? Thaddeus ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Memory usage for MySQL
On Jul 19, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Thaddeus Quintin wrote: Or maybe it's trying to ask for a big shared memory segment...? Your guess is as good as mine. Are there tools or anything else I can use to try and figure this out? MySQL probably has some documentation which would help, although if you wait a bit, perhaps Greg Lehey or someone more familiar with MySQL +FreeBSD will chime in... :-) -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
memory usage
i have a server that has 2GB ram, recently upgraded from 1GB ram. it runs apache2.0 with php5, sendmail with spamass-milter, dovecot, mysql5.0, cacti, and a couple other small things (like snmp, my bx irc shell, etc). when ever i look at the memory usage (via phpsysinfo, or cacti graphs), its nearly always showing less than 100mb of ram available. top shows several perls (probably spamassassin), 8 or so httpds (typical), but that would probably only account for (a liberal guess) 500-600 mb of ram. is there a good way to find out where this bottomless ram funnel leads to? or, should this behavior just be considered typical? thanks, jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: memory usage
On Sunday 07 May 2006 12:09, Jonathan Horne wrote: i have a server that has 2GB ram, recently upgraded from 1GB ram. it runs apache2.0 with php5, sendmail with spamass-milter, dovecot, mysql5.0, cacti, and a couple other small things (like snmp, my bx irc shell, etc). when ever i look at the memory usage (via phpsysinfo, or cacti graphs), its nearly always showing less than 100mb of ram available. top shows several perls (probably spamassassin), 8 or so httpds (typical), but that would probably only account for (a liberal guess) 500-600 mb of ram. is there a good way to find out where this bottomless ram funnel leads to? or, should this behavior just be considered typical? thanks, jonathan update... i just upgraded to the new phpsysinfo rc2, and it shows more detailed information about what the memory usage is doing. it shows that 1.57GB is being used by buffers. what is the significance of 1.57GB of memory being used by 'buffers'? thanks, jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: memory usage
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 12:19:41PM -0500, Jonathan Horne wrote: i just upgraded to the new phpsysinfo rc2, and it shows more detailed information about what the memory usage is doing. it shows that 1.57GB is being used by buffers. what is the significance of 1.57GB of memory being used by 'buffers'? http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/misc.html#TOP-FREEMEM -- Jonathan Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: memory usage
Jonathan Horne wrote: On Sunday 07 May 2006 12:09, Jonathan Horne wrote: i have a server that has 2GB ram, recently upgraded from 1GB ram. it runs apache2.0 with php5, sendmail with spamass-milter, dovecot, mysql5.0, cacti, and a couple other small things (like snmp, my bx irc shell, etc). when ever i look at the memory usage (via phpsysinfo, or cacti graphs), its nearly always showing less than 100mb of ram available. top shows several perls (probably spamassassin), 8 or so httpds (typical), but that would probably only account for (a liberal guess) 500-600 mb of ram. is there a good way to find out where this bottomless ram funnel leads to? or, should this behavior just be considered typical? thanks, jonathan update... i just upgraded to the new phpsysinfo rc2, and it shows more detailed information about what the memory usage is doing. it shows that 1.57GB is being used by buffers. what is the significance of 1.57GB of memory being used by 'buffers'? I would expect a question like this is somewhere in the FAQ. It is typical that you only see a couple of hundred kilobytes of free memory on a (at least a little used) FreeBSD system. The system allocates 'physical' memory as needed (as long as there is some free) and only when there is no free memory, it starts to reuse some of the 'almost' free memory. 'Almost' free memory is mainly disk cache (your buffers). This is nothing to worry about. You can see there is a memory shortage when there is some swapping during normal workload (in top there appears kb in/out on the swap line). It is neither anything to worry about when you have some swap space used - FreeBSD is rather aggresively copying parts of memory to swap when it feels to. As long as it doesn't need to use the data in the swap often it's an optimization - even disk cache is better usage of your memory then inactive parts of your programs' memory. Michal ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: memory usage
On Sunday 07 May 2006 19:43, Michal Mertl wrote: Jonathan Horne wrote: On Sunday 07 May 2006 12:09, Jonathan Horne wrote: i have a server that has 2GB ram, recently upgraded from 1GB ram. it runs apache2.0 with php5, sendmail with spamass-milter, dovecot, mysql5.0, cacti, and a couple other small things (like snmp, my bx irc shell, etc). when ever i look at the memory usage (via phpsysinfo, or cacti graphs), its nearly always showing less than 100mb of ram available. top shows several perls (probably spamassassin), 8 or so httpds (typical), but that would probably only account for (a liberal guess) 500-600 mb of ram. is there a good way to find out where this bottomless ram funnel leads to? or, should this behavior just be considered typical? thanks, jonathan update... i just upgraded to the new phpsysinfo rc2, and it shows more detailed information about what the memory usage is doing. it shows that 1.57GB is being used by buffers. what is the significance of 1.57GB of memory being used by 'buffers'? I would expect a question like this is somewhere in the FAQ. It is typical that you only see a couple of hundred kilobytes of free memory on a (at least a little used) FreeBSD system. The system allocates 'physical' memory as needed (as long as there is some free) and only when there is no free memory, it starts to reuse some of the 'almost' free memory. 'Almost' free memory is mainly disk cache (your buffers). This is nothing to worry about. You can see there is a memory shortage when there is some swapping during normal workload (in top there appears kb in/out on the swap line). It is neither anything to worry about when you have some swap space used - FreeBSD is rather aggresively copying parts of memory to swap when it feels to. As long as it doesn't need to use the data in the swap often it's an optimization - even disk cache is better usage of your memory then inactive parts of your programs' memory. Michal well, i guess my system's top confirms what you say: Swap: 4071M Total, 4071M Free and, i wasnt experiencing any lack in performance, i was just curious. but i admit that i must be forgiven for almost doubting! thanks again, jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: httpd and memory usage
* David Banning ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I seem to have a lot of memory being eaten by httpd (part output of top); Any ideas to have httpd timeout sooner to preserve memory? MaxRequestsPerChild is there to cope with leaks, it won't help if Apache is using a lot of memory to start with though, but if you've got some mod_php or mod_perl which leaks it can be handy. Worker MPM uses threads and will probably share more memory than prefork, not to mention require you to use fewer processes to handle a given load. Moving things like mod_php and mod_perl stuff to FastCGI avoids each httpd having a copy of the interpreter and its various data structures each, and segments the memory of the interpreters outside httpd so it's easier to see what's using the memory; you'll have fewer copies running too, since the static:dynamic request ratio isn't normally 1:1. Commenting out unused modules in httpd.conf will save some memory. You might also consider switching to something like lighttpd, which uses a single process that's generally about 1/3 the size of an equivilent httpd process. -- Thomas 'Freaky' Hurst http://hur.st/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: httpd and memory usage
Moving things like mod_php and mod_perl stuff to FastCGI avoids each httpd having a copy of the interpreter and its various data structures each, and segments the memory of the interpreters outside httpd so it's easier to see what's using the memory; you'll have fewer copies running too, since the static:dynamic request ratio isn't normally 1:1. Commenting out unused modules in httpd.conf will save some memory. You might also consider switching to something like lighttpd, which uses a single process that's generally about 1/3 the size of an equivilent httpd process. I like these ideas. Thanks. What is the downside, if any, to using lighttpd? Is it difficult to configure? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: httpd and memory usage
* David Banning ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: You might also consider switching to something like lighttpd, which uses a single process that's generally about 1/3 the size of an equivilent httpd process. I like these ideas. Thanks. What is the downside, if any, to using lighttpd? Is it difficult to configure? No, it's very easy to get working, especially with FastCGI; it's just not quite as flexible as Apache in many respects. This isn't always (or even usually) a bad thing, but it depends what your needs are. -- Thomas 'Freaky' Hurst http://hur.st/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
httpd and memory usage
I seem to have a lot of memory being eaten by httpd (part output of top); 62310 nobody 18 0 26792K 21516K lockf0:04 0.00% 0.00% httpd 162 root 2 0 4328K 2244K select 0:04 0.00% 0.00% sendmail 63909 nobody 18 0 26824K 21528K lockf0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 62311 nobody 2 0 26740K 21432K select 0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 62764 nobody 18 0 26604K 21252K lockf0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 62800 nobody 18 0 26608K 21248K lockf0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 62312 nobody 18 0 26636K 21292K lockf0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 62309 nobody 18 0 26820K 21436K lockf0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 62313 nobody 18 0 26592K 21228K lockf0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 62381 nobody 18 0 26768K 21404K lockf0:03 0.00% 0.00% httpd 287 root 2 0 13108K 7460K select 0:02 0.00% 0.00% httpd I have changed the timeout in httpd.conf from 300 to 100 which does not seem to help. Any ideas to have httpd timeout sooner to preserve memory? -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: httpd and memory usage
David Banning wrote: I seem to have a lot of memory being eaten by httpd (part output of top); 62310 nobody 18 0 26792K 21516K lockf0:04 0.00% 0.00% httpd [ ... ] I have changed the timeout in httpd.conf from 300 to 100 which does not seem to help. It wouldn't. Apache is normally run in a prefork mode, which means it keeps lots of children (default is 5, plus the master) running all of the time. Any ideas to have httpd timeout sooner to preserve memory? If you want to reduce the memory usage, avoid using mod_perl or PHP. httpd ought to shrink down to ~5MB or so per process. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: httpd and memory usage
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 02:40:01PM -0400, Chuck Swiger wrote: David Banning wrote: I seem to have a lot of memory being eaten by httpd (part output of top); 62310 nobody 18 0 26792K 21516K lockf0:04 0.00% 0.00% httpd [ ... ] I have changed the timeout in httpd.conf from 300 to 100 which does not seem to help. It wouldn't. Apache is normally run in a prefork mode, which means it keeps lots of children (default is 5, plus the master) running all of the time. Any ideas to have httpd timeout sooner to preserve memory? If you want to reduce the memory usage, avoid using mod_perl or PHP. httpd ought to shrink down to ~5MB or so per process. Here is the thing though. I can apachectl restart and memory is plentiful. So it seems like httpd -can- operate on lower memory, albeit maybe five as you say. Surely visitors have no need for the page, whether it be php or not. Is there a way for those memory consuming httpd jobs to die earlier? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please educate me on memory usage
I was looking at my top output and was surprised to see that the bulk of my 512 MB of memory was in use, since the server really has fairly little running. It's not a problem, but I was wanting some clarification on where this memory was being used, for my own education. The original goal was that I had figured that a lot of memory would be unused since so little is running, and perhaps I could allocate some more to Postgres. Apparently nowt, but I don't quite understand all the intricacies of what *is* using my memory. 35 processes: 1 running, 34 sleeping CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% idle Mem: 158M Active, 207M Inact, 80M Wired, 20M Cache, 60M Buf, 33M Free Swap: 2000M Total, 6848K Used, 1994M Free So, 158 MB of memory in use. Does that include anything other than process' memory, e.g. shared memory, kernel memory, some of the fs buffer? If I add up the VSZ column from 'ps aux' I get 110 MB. The server's only processes of interest are MySQL, Postgres, and Apache httpd. There are cron, sendmail, etc. but these are all 1M usage according to both top and ps. MySQL has VSZ 38 MB and RSS 4 MB. Postgres (incl stats collectors) has VSZ 25 MB and RSS 1 MB. There's also the shared memory: ipcs agrees with my postgresql.conf settings: 2 MB of shared memory buffers. Apache 1.3 has 15 processes, each using 3.6 MB VSZ and 1.5 MB RSS. I was of the impression that the bulk of this memory was shared with the parent process, no? So where's the rest of the memory going? The 80M Wired is interesting, since I don't know where it's going. I presume that PG's 2 MB of shared buffers are wired (though I saw an email today that implied otherwise), but how could I track down the rest of it? __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: please educate me on memory usage
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Gregor Mosheh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was looking at my top output and was surprised to see that the bulk of my 512 MB of memory was in use, since the server really has fairly little running. It's not a problem, but I was wanting some clarification on where this memory was being used, for my own education. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/misc.html#TOP-FREEMEM hth, epi The original goal was that I had figured that a lot of memory would be unused since so little is running, and perhaps I could allocate some more to Postgres. Apparently nowt, but I don't quite understand all the intricacies of what *is* using my memory. 35 processes: 1 running, 34 sleeping CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% idle Mem: 158M Active, 207M Inact, 80M Wired, 20M Cache, 60M Buf, 33M Free Swap: 2000M Total, 6848K Used, 1994M Free So, 158 MB of memory in use. Does that include anything other than process' memory, e.g. shared memory, kernel memory, some of the fs buffer? If I add up the VSZ column from 'ps aux' I get 110 MB. The server's only processes of interest are MySQL, Postgres, and Apache httpd. There are cron, sendmail, etc. but these are all 1M usage according to both top and ps. MySQL has VSZ 38 MB and RSS 4 MB. Postgres (incl stats collectors) has VSZ 25 MB and RSS 1 MB. There's also the shared memory: ipcs agrees with my postgresql.conf settings: 2 MB of shared memory buffers. Apache 1.3 has 15 processes, each using 3.6 MB VSZ and 1.5 MB RSS. I was of the impression that the bulk of this memory was shared with the parent process, no? So where's the rest of the memory going? The 80M Wired is interesting, since I don't know where it's going. I presume that PG's 2 MB of shared buffers are wired (though I saw an email today that implied otherwise), but how could I track down the rest of it? __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: please educate me on memory usage
Gregor Mosheh wrote: I was looking at my top output and was surprised to see that the bulk of my 512 MB of memory was in use, since the server really has fairly little running. It's not a problem, but I was wanting some clarification on where this memory was being used, for my own education. The original goal was that I had figured that a lot of memory would be unused since so little is running, and perhaps I could allocate some more to Postgres. Apparently nowt, but I don't quite understand all the intricacies of what *is* using my memory. 35 processes: 1 running, 34 sleeping CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% idle Mem: 158M Active, 207M Inact, 80M Wired, 20M Cache, 60M Buf, 33M Free Swap: 2000M Total, 6848K Used, 1994M Free So, 158 MB of memory in use. Does that include anything other than process' memory, e.g. shared memory, kernel memory, some of the fs buffer? If I add up the VSZ column from 'ps aux' I get 110 MB. The server's only processes of interest are MySQL, Postgres, and Apache httpd. There are cron, sendmail, etc. but these are all 1M usage according to both top and ps. MySQL has VSZ 38 MB and RSS 4 MB. Postgres (incl stats collectors) has VSZ 25 MB and RSS 1 MB. There's also the shared memory: ipcs agrees with my postgresql.conf settings: 2 MB of shared memory buffers. Apache 1.3 has 15 processes, each using 3.6 MB VSZ and 1.5 MB RSS. I was of the impression that the bulk of this memory was shared with the parent process, no? So where's the rest of the memory going? The 80M Wired is interesting, since I don't know where it's going. I presume that PG's 2 MB of shared buffers are wired (though I saw an email today that implied otherwise), but how could I track down the rest of it? __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] My guess would be MySQL, however I am no expert. My machine is running apache, ntp, ipfw, and other typical stuff like syslog, sendmail, etc. Mem: 11M Active, 122M Inact, 44M Wired, 28K Cache, 57 Buf, 292M Free. I did optimize my machine using doc's I read on www.FreeBSD.org. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
memory usage question
Hi, I have a question about usage of memory. Despite the well documented articles about it some things are still unclear. In top we see memory devided in several items: Active, inactive, buffered, wired and free. The active memory is clear, it's what is in use by programs now. Wired mem is also clear, it's for the kernel data structs. When a program ends, the mem is put in the inactive part right? So when the program is run 10 minutes after it can be started very quickly, also because the data used from the disk of that program is still in the cache part right? However, suppose the program isnt run in 2 hours, will there be a timeout in the parts which are being put in inactive and in cache? Suppose the timeout has occured, will the mem be added to free mem or? What is the difference between buffered mem and cached mem? Both represent data which is recently being called from the disk, so that next time when the file is called again, no disk access, needs to be made in order to save time right? However, suppose i have little mem free, say 7 mb and still 200 in inactive. Then a program needs to start which needs say 30 mb on mem, will also mem be taken from the inactive part and discard the cache? Some ppl only look at how much free mem is available on their system and then sound the alarm, however, shouldnt they add inactive and free together in order to see how much mem can be used for newly used programs (which didnt run before?). Bye, Mipam. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: memory usage question
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 03:39:40PM +0200, Mipam wrote: I have a question about usage of memory. Despite the well documented articles about it some things are still unclear. In top we see memory devided in several items: Try this article, buy the guy who wrote some very large chunks of the VM system: http://www.daemonnews.org/21/freebsd_vm.html As for the meaning of the different labels top(1) shows attached to memory sizes: those indicate a sequence of memory caches for different age levels of pages. Note that the system doesn't overwrite cached pages on a timed basis, but rather picks the oldest unused memory to recycle as and when some other application requests it. Stuff can stay in the memory caches for a very long time on a quiet system. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/misc.html#TOP-FREEMEM Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK pgpJznDRYHpps.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to get memory usage for process?
Artem Koutchine wrote: Hi! I need to figure out how much memory process really takes. For example, i am running 100 perl scripts, they are all the same source and i guess some memory is shared among them (mostly perl interperter i guess). So, i need to know how much memory is shared and how much memory is used for each new running script (including buffers, e.t.c.). What command shoud do the trick and with what options? In case you have the PROCFS mounted (usually under /proc) you can get a detailed listing of the memory map of a process, together with the relevant flags for the various memory segments that indicate memory sharing etc. Try this: cat /proc/pid/map 'pid' is of course to be replaced by the PID of the process you want to examine. Uwe -- Uwe Doering | EscapeBox - Managed On-Demand UNIX Servers [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.escapebox.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to get memory usage for process?
Hi! I need to figure out how much memory process really takes. For example, i am running 100 perl scripts, they are all the same source and i guess some memory is shared among them (mostly perl interperter i guess). So, i need to know how much memory is shared and how much memory is used for each new running script (including buffers, e.t.c.). What command shoud do the trick and with what options? Regards, Artem ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to get memory usage for process?
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, Artem Koutchine wrote: Hi! I need to figure out how much memory process really takes. For example, i am running 100 perl scripts, they are all the same source and i guess some memory is shared among them (mostly perl interperter i guess). So, i need to know how much memory is shared and how much memory is used for each new running script (including buffers, e.t.c.). What command shoud do the trick and with what options? You're probably after the sysutils/pmap utility, in the ports. -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ ...perl has been dead for more than 4 years. - Abigail in the Monastery ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] J 1.) Where is my Free memory going? given what you say custom-python-qmail-scanner-clamd-qmail-queue This whole scenario is very memory intensive. First you have each email pythonized and then qmail-scanner is *very* memory intensive, as it has initially a very heavy duty perl script for each email before being passed off to clamd. Clamd is a separate issue, since the only clamav command actually run from the pipeline (and thus under the restrictions of softlimit) is the clamdscan client, which is NOT memory intensive. Yes, clamd contributes to the overall memory footprint, but I'm only concerned with getting softlimit set properly at this point. My machine can always revert to swap, but the second softlimit is exceeded the email will be temporarily defered, which I consider a Bad Thing. Having said that, yes, it is still a very memory intensive pipeline. I took some time to profile the memory usage a few days ago, and it looks like the most memory the pipeline should ever use at any given point in time is ~12780K, with the following processes running: USER PID PPID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TT STAT STARTED TIME COMMAND qmaild 24716 24553 0.0 0.2 920 460 ?? I 7:39PM 1:08.07 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd qmaild 24718 24716 0.0 0.3 884 488 ?? I 7:39PM 0:08.63 /usr/local/bin/qmail-qfilter /var/qmail/queue-filters/block-forged-sender.py -s qmailq 24730 24718 9.2 2.1 5052 3988 ?? S 7:41PM 0:55.87 /usr/bin/suidperl -T /dev/fd/4//var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl (perl) qmailq 24739 24730 69.7 2.1 5052 3988 ?? R 7:43PM 0:06.55 /usr/bin/suidperl -T /dev/fd/4//var/qmail/bin/qmail-scanner-queue.pl (perl) qmailq 24740 24739 14.4 0.2 872 400 ?? R 7:43PM 0:01.28 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue (qmail-scanner is silly. For some reason it spawns a copy of itself, possibly to hand the message off to qmail-queue.) But even with the softlimit set to 15M, my huge test message to a server with only about 80M of free RAM (before sending the message. Free Memory dropped to ~500k while handling the message) somehow managed to exceed the softlimit. The exact same message, sent to a machine with ~600M of free RAM and an identical mail server setup, passed through the pipeline without tripping the softlimit. From what I have seen while watching a huge message pass down the pipeline, none of the processes in the pipeline increase memory usage in proportion to email size. They're all relatively static. So I'm a little confused about why the softlimit would be tripped on a box that had less RAM (128M) but pass through successfully on a box with more RAM (1G). Would the act of using more swap effectively increase a process's: data segment usage? stack segment usage? locked physical pages per process? total of all segments per process? These are the things that softlimit limits (according to `man softlimit`), and I admittedly don't understand how any of the above translates to memory usage as shown by VSZ and RSS under `ps`, or SIZE and RES under `top`. Any ideas? Maybe running vmstat -w 1 would give you a different perspective also. I'll check it out. -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 11), Jesse Guardiani said: 1.) Where is my Free memory going? I can't account for it in the SIZE and RES columns of the various processes. These are relatively constant. Disk cache. I thought it might be something like that. My large test messages are being written to disk over and over and over as the message travels down the pipline. Makes a great case for installing a RAM disk. :) 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this: RES is the current amount of resident memory, but does that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that RES should be counted in addition to SIZE? RES the amount of SIZE that it currently in core OK. To clarify, you mean core kernel memory here? If so, how is that significant? Why should I care? In other words, why would I ever want to know that? Thanks. -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
In the last episode (Sep 12), Jesse Guardiani said: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 11), Jesse Guardiani said: 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this: RES is the current amount of resident memory, but does that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that RES should be counted in addition to SIZE? RES the amount of SIZE that it currently in core OK. To clarify, you mean core kernel memory here? If so, how is that significant? Why should I care? In other words, why would I ever want to know that? core meaning physical memory; user memory in this case. Processes can lock kernel memory, but there's no easy way of listing that (it's usually a small amount held in pipe or socket buffers and is short-lived). The name core came from when memory bits were ferrite rings magnetized by wires running through them. http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/core.html -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
Jesse Guardiani [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 11), Jesse Guardiani said: 1.) Where is my Free memory going? I can't account for it in the SIZE and RES columns of the various processes. These are relatively constant. Disk cache. I thought it might be something like that. My large test messages are being written to disk over and over and over as the message travels down the pipline. Makes a great case for installing a RAM disk. :) No, probably not. The OS disk-caching is probably *more* efficient than letting the data go into a RAM disk at each stage. Considerably so, in fact. 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this: RES is the current amount of resident memory, but does that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that RES should be counted in addition to SIZE? RES the amount of SIZE that it currently in core OK. To clarify, you mean core kernel memory here? No, it's not in kernel space. Core just refers to RAM: the term is held over from the days when main memory was constructed out of little magnetic cores in a wire matrix. If so, how is that significant? Why should I care? If your system starts swapping heavily, that will often be the clue that tells you why. Just one example. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 12), Jesse Guardiani said: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 11), Jesse Guardiani said: 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this: RES is the current amount of resident memory, but does that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that RES should be counted in addition to SIZE? RES the amount of SIZE that it currently in core OK. To clarify, you mean core kernel memory here? If so, how is that significant? Why should I care? In other words, why would I ever want to know that? core meaning physical memory; user memory in this case. OK. And how does core, or user memory differ from SIZE memory then? If X = SIZE - RES, where is X stored? Processes can lock kernel memory, but there's no easy way of listing that (it's usually a small amount held in pipe or socket buffers and is short-lived). The name core came from when memory bits were ferrite rings magnetized by wires running through them. http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/core.html Wow. That's a really cool bit of history. I don't quite understand how a core is switched, but I'm sure it must have worked. -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
In the last episode (Sep 12), Jesse Guardiani said: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 12), Jesse Guardiani said: Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Sep 11), Jesse Guardiani said: 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this: RES is the current amount of resident memory, but does that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that RES should be counted in addition to SIZE? RES the amount of SIZE that it currently in core OK. To clarify, you mean core kernel memory here? If so, how is that significant? Why should I care? In other words, why would I ever want to know that? core meaning physical memory; user memory in this case. OK. And how does core, or user memory differ from SIZE memory then? If X = SIZE - RES, where is X stored? You don't need to store it, since you know SIZE and RES :) X is any memory mapped into process space that is not in physical memory at the moment; it could be dirty or private pages swapped to disk, or program code that can be pulled from the binary on the filesystem if necessary, or malloced memory that hasn't been written to yet. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
Howdy list, I checked the FAQ and the questions archive before I posted this, so hopefully it isn't a frequently asked question: Background: = I am stress testing a FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE server (it's a pre- production test server) by sending huge email messages to it via SMTP. I'm running qmail-1.03 built from source, with the QMAILQUEUE patch, qmail-qfilter, a custom Python script that runs under qmail-qfilter, and qmail-scanner with ClamAV. I test the server by sending a 59M or a 99M email from a remote machine (connected via fxp0). Please, spare me the gaggle about 59M emails being too large. I am perfectly aware of the silliness associated with sending a 59M file via SMTP. I'm only interested in stress testing this server right now. Thanks! Now please read on: The Situation: == As I watch the email travel down the qmail-smtpd-qmail-qfilter- custom-python-qmail-scanner-clamd-qmail-queue pipeline, I watch the memory usage with `top`. Memory is critical in this type of application, since I run my qmail-smtpd pipeline under DJB's softlimit program. I MUST know how much memory to allocate for the upper limit of each pipeline, otherwise qmail-smtpd will terminate the transfer with a 451 SMTP error. Anyway, as I watch `top`, I never see more than 15M being used by the various pipeline programs at any given point in time, but my Free Memory constantly declines until it reaches about 526k. The Questions: == 1.) Where is my Free memory going? I can't account for it in the SIZE and RES columns of the various processes. These are relatively constant. 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this: RES is the current amount of resident memory, but does that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that RES should be counted in addition to SIZE? Thanks! -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
In the last episode (Sep 11), Jesse Guardiani said: 1.) Where is my Free memory going? I can't account for it in the SIZE and RES columns of the various processes. These are relatively constant. Disk cache. 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this: RES is the current amount of resident memory, but does that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that RES should be counted in addition to SIZE? RES the amount of SIZE that it currently in core, and thus should never exceed SIZE (I don't see any processes on my system that do at least). -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
Hello Jesse, Thursday, September 11, 2003, 5:15:31 PM, you wrote: J I am stress testing a FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE server (it's a pre- J production test server) by sending huge email messages to it J via SMTP. I too am putting together a 4.8 box as we speak for a client. J I'm running qmail-1.03 built from source, with the QMAILQUEUE J patch, qmail-qfilter, a custom Python script that runs under J qmail-qfilter, and qmail-scanner with ClamAV. J I test the server by sending a 59M or a 99M email from a J remote machine (connected via fxp0). J As I watch the email travel down the qmail-smtpd-qmail-qfilter- custom-python-qmail-scanner-clamd-qmail-queue pipeline, J I watch the memory usage with `top`. J Memory is critical in this type of application, since I run my J qmail-smtpd pipeline under DJB's softlimit program. I MUST J know how much memory to allocate for the upper limit of each J pipeline, otherwise qmail-smtpd will terminate the transfer J with a 451 SMTP error. right. J Anyway, as I watch `top`, I never see more than 15M being used J by the various pipeline programs at any given point in time, J but my Free Memory constantly declines until it reaches about J 526k. J The Questions: J == J 1.) Where is my Free memory going? given what you say custom-python-qmail-scanner-clamd-qmail-queue This whole scenario is very memory intensive. First you have each email pythonized and then qmail-scanner is *very* memory intensive, as it has initially a very heavy duty perl script for each email before being passed off to clamd. Multiply this with the default SMTP concurrency limit of 20, and you have a lot of memory usage. Clamd is known to be a memory piggie too. I switched from that to using fprot which uses less memory and is faster processing. J I can't account for it J in the SIZE and RES columns of the various processes. J These are relatively constant. Maybe running vmstat -w 1 would give you a different perspective also. -- Best regards, Gary ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Limiting memory usage of a certain process.
Hi all, I've got the following problem with my FBSD-4.7-STABLE-box: It is running a mldonkey-2.02-client under a dedicated user. This process eats up all memory. Thus the system starts swapping. This is in general not a big problem but it slows down the whole machine, which is also running several other services. My question now is how to limit the mldonkey-precess' memory usage. I've got 64 MB of core and the CPU is a Pentium 166, so not to fast at all, but sufficient for everything else. top tells me that under normal load, without the mldonkey, about about five MB of core are free. mldonkey needs about 20 MB which are resistant and overall size (as top says) gets up to 70 MB, thus about 80 MB of swap space get used, nearly zero under normal load. top also says that about 30 MB of core are wired all the time. I'd like to know, what this means and wheather it makes sense to decrease this (and if, how), so that more space is left in RAM. I tried to limit core-use of mldonkey by putting it into a seperate login group with a lowered maxmemorysize but that had no effect. I also niced it up, but that has no effect on swap usage, of course. So, is there any possibility to speed up the machine except putting in more physical RAM? Help appreciated. Florian To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Re: Limiting memory usage of a certain process.
Hi, On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 03:26:25PM +0100, Florian Lorenzen typed: Hi all, I've got the following problem with my FBSD-4.7-STABLE-box: It is running a mldonkey-2.02-client under a dedicated user. This process eats up all memory. Thus the system starts swapping. This is in general not a big problem but it slows down the whole machine, which is also running several other services. My question now is how to limit the mldonkey-precess' memory usage. I've got 64 MB of core and the CPU is a Pentium 166, so not to fast at all, but sufficient for everything else. top tells me that under normal load, without the mldonkey, about about five MB of core are free. mldonkey needs about 20 MB which are resistant and overall size (as top says) gets up to 70 MB, thus about 80 MB of swap space get used, nearly zero under normal load. top also says that about 30 MB of core are wired all the time. I'd like to know, what this means and wheather it makes sense to decrease this (and if, how), so that more space is left in RAM. I tried to limit core-use of mldonkey by putting it into a seperate login group with a lowered maxmemorysize but that had no effect. I also niced it up, but that has no effect on swap usage, of course. When you put it in a separate login class (you do mean class, not group, do you?) did you run the command cap_mkdb login.conf? So, is there any possibility to speed up the machine except putting in more physical RAM? Help appreciated. Florian To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Re: Limiting memory usage of a certain process.
Yep, I mean login class and I ran cap_mkdb afterwards. Any other hints? Florian I tried to limit core-use of mldonkey by putting it into a seperate login group with a lowered maxmemorysize but that had no effect. I also niced it up, but that has no effect on swap usage, of course. When you put it in a separate login class (you do mean class, not group, do you?) did you run the command cap_mkdb login.conf? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Question about memory usage
I'm running FreeBSD 4.5, on a P-133 system. I just upgraded my RAM yesterday from 80MB to 256MB, because it always used to sit at 93-94% used when I had 80. Well now that I installed more, it's sitting at 93% used again. Being newer to BSD, is there a way I can check what is using memory...or does it just do that automatically? Thanks for the help! Matt Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
RE: Question about memory usage
man top - Barry -- Barry Byrne, IT Manager, WBT Systems, Block 2, Harcourt Centre Harcourt Street, Dublin 2, Ireland -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Matt Winslow Sent: 19 November 2002 16:13 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Question about memory usage I'm running FreeBSD 4.5, on a P-133 system. I just upgraded my RAM yesterday from 80MB to 256MB, because it always used to sit at 93-94% used when I had 80. Well now that I installed more, it's sitting at 93% used again. Being newer to BSD, is there a way I can check what is using memory...or does it just do that automatically? Thanks for the help! Matt Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Re: Question about memory usage
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Matt Winslow wrote: Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 11:13:15 -0500 From: Matt Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Question about memory usage I'm running FreeBSD 4.5, on a P-133 system. I just upgraded my RAM yesterday from 80MB to 256MB, because it always used to sit at 93-94% used when I had 80. Well now that I installed more, it's sitting at 93% used again. Being newer to BSD, is there a way I can check what is using memory...or does it just do that automatically? Thanks for the help! Matt Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] BSD will use whatever memory you give it. Especially if you do a large compile or something of that nature. Going from 80 MB to 256 MB isn't that big of a step, esp. if it's a desktop system. Going from 256 MB to say 1.5 GB you should see your percentages drop somewhat. That is, for a desktop system. Remember that the memory usage statistics also contain shared memory and memory that is cached application data, which may be cleared and reused if a new application needs it. Also, in a server system, if you had 1 GB of memory and only showed 500 MB used, you'd have 500 MB of wasted memory to pull out and put in another box. 93% sounds like a good usage to me :) # John Bleichert # http://vonbek.dhs.org/latest.jpg To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Re: Question about memory usage
Thus spake Matt Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm running FreeBSD 4.5, on a P-133 system. I just upgraded my RAM yesterday from 80MB to 256MB, because it always used to sit at 93-94% used when I had 80. Well now that I installed more, it's sitting at 93% used again. Being newer to BSD, is there a way I can check what is using memory...or does it just do that automatically? Free memory is wasted memory. If you have more of it, FreeBSD will use more, e.g. by caching things longer. With the additional memory, you will probably notice that your system is faster and accesses the disk less frequently under load. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
Re: Question about memory usage
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 11:13:15AM -0500, Matt Winslow wrote: I'm running FreeBSD 4.5, on a P-133 system. I just upgraded my RAM yesterday from 80MB to 256MB, because it always used to sit at 93-94% used when I had 80. Well now that I installed more, it's sitting at 93% used again. Being newer to BSD, is there a way I can check what is using memory...or does it just do that automatically? So you'd prefer that the extra memory you added was just sitting there unused (i.e. wasted)? :-) Kris msg09363/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Question about memory usage
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 11:13:15AM -0500, Matt Winslow wrote: I'm running FreeBSD 4.5, on a P-133 system. I just upgraded my RAM yesterday from 80MB to 256MB, because it always used to sit at 93-94% used when I had 80. Well now that I installed more, it's sitting at 93% used again. Being newer to BSD, is there a way I can check what is using memory...or does it just do that automatically? top(1) will show how much memory is allocated to the top resource using processes. jerry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
XFree86 memory usage
I'm trying to figure out why X11 is using so much memory on my workstation. Here is the output from 'top': PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPUCPU COMMAND 236 steve 2 0 215M 210M select 1 435:16 0.05% 0.05% XFree86 215MB seems like alot to me. OTOH, this is a dual 1.8Ghz Xeon box with 1GB RAM so I'm not losing any sleep over it. However I am curious to know if this is normal or indicative of some memory leaks in applications. My current environment is Gnome2, although the number doesn't decrease drastically with Windowomaker either. +-+ |Steve Wingate [EMAIL PROTECTED] |MCSE, CCNA Mon Nov 11 09:59:00 PST 2002 +-+ |FreeBSD 4.7-RC | 9:59AM up 23 days, 10:31, 2 users, load averages: 0.11, 0.07, 0.02 +-+ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-questions in the body of the message
