On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 10:05 PM Guy Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Dec 10, 2018, at 8:18 PM, Richard Sharpe <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 8:11 PM Guy Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Dec 10, 2018, at 5:16 PM, Richard Sharpe <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> The Wireshark process is only consuming about 1.7GB of memory at the > >>> moment and 17% of CPU on my laptop with NVMe and oodles of memory and > >>> a 4-core Xeon. > >> > >> "At the moment" as in "after it finished loading, it's only consuming..." > >> or "while it's loading, it's consuming..."? > > > > While it's loading it's consuming ... > > So if it's using one core, 25% would mean it's eating up all of one core's > worth of CPU time (although it may or may not stay on that core). > > However, if it's a threaded Xeon, that's 4 physical cores and 8 virtual > cores, so 12.5% would be one core/one thread's worth of CPU time. > > So it's possible that Wireshark is using an entire thread for one core, and > is CPU-bound.
It's actually worse than I thought. I actually now have two ~10GB captures, one for each stream After grabbing a slice of one around where I thing the problem is, I see there seems to be one or more dropped packets. I may be able to repair the breakage with something that is 'fake but accurate' and the slice is only ~400MB which is more tractable. -- Regards, Richard Sharpe (何以解憂？唯有杜康。--曹操)(传说杜康是酒的发明者) ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
