User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 7:09 UTC (Fri) by k8to (subscriber, #15413)
In reply to: CrunchBang Linux 8.10 by proski
Parent article: CrunchBang Linux 8.10

The computer was perfectly responsive, when it wasn't swapping.
It only swapped when running mozilla, all other programs were fine.

I'm just wondering what the bloat statistics are that a "bare bones" system now uses around 120 megs, when back then (2002-ish), my system used around 30. I certainly understand that browsers are now required to be more complicated, and that desktop environments have gotten more .. featureful. But this includes neither. Is this the responsibility of hal? udev? Everyone?


(Log in to post comments)

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 11:47 UTC (Fri) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link]

While a lot of that is due to size increases in userspace, there are overheads in managing the extra resources found in a system today (e.g. it takes more memory to manage 2GB of memory than it does to manage 64MB). Also, if you're using a 64-bit kernel certain structures now take up more memory too.

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 12:07 UTC (Fri) by alankila (guest, #47141) [Link]

It's pretty much everyone. I think hal is relatively innocuous, and udev is very cheap, too. No, the problem appears to be with the GUI programs that make for instance the default GNOME desktop.

On my Ubuntu install, I can count about 5 GNOME programs that I could easily live without, that each use unique memory between 5 to 15 MB. (Whatever they are sharing might come for free, or with smaller cost, and it is difficult to estimate.)

For instance, a monster called update-notifier has 23 MB resident memory, of which only 10 MB is shared. I don't know what that program does that is worth at least 13 MB, given that most of the time it just lurks invisibly in the background.

mixer-applet2 that mostly shows a single volume icon has a 22M - 10M statistic giving 12 MB private memory use. fast-user-switching-applet is the same. Gnome power manager costs 8M (on a desktop system, too, where it's worthless). Hell, mere trash icon in panel costs 3 MB.

No matter how efficient you try to make any individual process, there's also the problem that a linux desktop today runs about 150 process, of which about full 50 come from kernel (and are probably cheap). The 100 userland processes necessary to service a single user each spend some resources for sure, but at least most of them use less than 1 MB of private RAM.

Funnily, the process that uses just above 1 MB of private RAM here happens to be hald, every other system process consumes less. And everything above that point is mostly gnome stuff...

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 12:35 UTC (Fri) by alankila (guest, #47141) [Link]

Hmm. This bug may be about it: Pango might be culprit for wasting 6 MB per app:

http://www.nabble.com/pango-opentype---huge-memory-waste-(DejaVu-font)-td21599596.html

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 15:32 UTC (Fri) by biged (guest, #50106) [Link]

interesting - the problem as reported, and patched, reduced system footprint from 200M to 130M - very significant.

http://www.nabble.com/pango-opentype---huge-memory-waste-...

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 14:57 UTC (Fri) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]

From top output:

RES SHR COMMAND
220m 28m firefox
123m 14m Xorg
100m 21m pidgin
76m 26m thunderbird-bin
39m 16m gedit
34m 14m nautilus
32m 14m gnome-terminal
[snip]

Need more be said?

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 15:17 UTC (Fri) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]

For comparision, the editor "joe" (with just one file, but it was twice as large as the total length of the three in gedit) had a resident size of 2M.

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 16:14 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Much of xorg's RSS is going to be things like mmap()ed video memory: not relevant here.

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 16:16 UTC (Fri) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]

Ah, I was wondering...

CrunchBang Linux 8.10

Posted Feb 27, 2009 23:22 UTC (Fri) by jwb (guest, #15467) [Link]

Part of the problem is the explosion of storage-to-memory ratio. 15 years ago I had a computer with 20 times more storage than memory. Now I have a thousand times more storage than memory. It takes extra memory just to manage a filesystem that scales up to that size.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds