From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Pav9a-0001jx-1X for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 19:05:42 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F2F28E0710 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 19:05:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.nuigalway.ie (mx1.nuigalway.ie [140.203.201.100]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B45FE0462 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 18:52:01 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmoFAOOdJU2Myzge/2dsb2JhbACWD48CvXaFTAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,284,1291593600"; d="scan'208";a="160750123" Received: from frink.nuigalway.ie (HELO riviera.nuigalway.ie) ([140.203.56.30]) by mx1.nuigalway.ie with ESMTP; 06 Jan 2011 18:51:59 +0000 Received: from felix by riviera.nuigalway.ie with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PauwI-0007Tl-JG for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2011 18:51:58 +0000 Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 18:51:58 +0000 From: Darragh Bailey To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Memory usage; 32 bit vs 64 bit. Message-ID: <20110106185158.GA20445@compsoc.nuigalway.ie> References: <4D2216A9.9070009@gmail.com> <4D2243B4.8070800@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D2243B4.8070800@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-Archives-Salt: e967ec21-a0d5-4689-ad04-042ae573c4c0 X-Archives-Hash: 6b19175dc3670fc459ffd6ae5bf0fcb6 On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 03:46:28PM -0600, Dale wrote: > Well, I start with a saved session. I usually have seamonkey, Konsole, > Konqueror, Kpatience and gkrellm running. I also run folding at well. > I have checked when folding is not running and it still uses more. I > use the same settings as on my old rig for folding. I may change to > larger units when I get another stick or two of ram in here. > > Here is some results from top with them sorted by memory usage: > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 18913 dale 20 0 793m 303m 30m S 3 7.7 21:35.05 seamonkey-bin > 18451 dale 20 0 871m 165m 40m S 1 4.2 40:47.95 plasma-desktop > 28665 root 39 19 304m 112m 2616 S 94 2.8 1918:38 FahCore_a3.exe > 25414 dale 20 0 607m 107m 9.8m S 0 2.7 1:33.53 knotify4 > 18453 dale 20 0 591m 99m 15m S 0 2.5 0:23.53 knotify4 > 18417 dale 20 0 618m 90m 41m S 2 2.3 23:59.85 kwin > 26081 root 39 19 280m 80m 2616 S 99 2.0 2138:13 FahCore_a3.exe > 28654 root 39 19 277m 80m 2616 S 99 2.0 1916:58 FahCore_a3.exe > 27537 root 39 19 280m 80m 2616 S 96 2.0 2021:21 FahCore_a3.exe > 5081 dale 20 0 474m 73m 31m S 0 1.9 0:31.91 konqueror > 18225 root 20 0 142m 61m 15m S 4 1.6 92:24.29 X > 18541 dale 20 0 470m 58m 27m S 0 1.5 0:35.72 kopete > 29937 root 20 0 573m 53m 35m S 0 1.4 0:26.64 konqueror > 26809 dale 20 0 202m 49m 30m S 0 1.2 0:29.16 mplayer > 18566 dale 20 0 367m 48m 27m S 0 1.2 0:01.00 python2.6 > 18564 dale 20 0 418m 45m 24m S 0 1.1 0:00.49 python2 > 11802 root 20 0 721m 43m 11m S 0 1.1 1:19.41 knotify4 > 18539 dale 20 0 408m 38m 20m S 0 1.0 2:11.97 kpat > 18491 dale 20 0 584m 37m 20m S 0 0.9 0:08.12 krunner > 18544 dale 20 0 356m 34m 17m S 0 0.9 0:47.28 konsole > 18371 dale 20 0 230m 31m 22m S 0 0.8 0:00.48 kdeinit4 > 18527 dale 20 0 417m 31m 16m S 0 0.8 0:00.48 kmix > 18374 dale 20 0 409m 29m 16m S 0 0.7 0:05.96 kded4 > > As you can tell, Seamonkey has been running a while. It still uses a > good bit even when freshly started. Here is my flags: > > CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -pipe" > CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}" > > I got them off a wiki for safe flags. I like fast but hate crashes. ;-) > > Dale > > :-) :-) I could be wrong here, but aren't both seamonkey-bin & FahCore_a3.exe 32bit applications? That would mean that you're likely loading both 32bit and 64bit versions of a number of libraries. Would certainly count towards a higher memory usage. -- Darragh "Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool."