On Mon, 2002-07-22 at 17:27, daniel wrote: ... > but instead of just running one copy of apache > it's running TEN > and the bind9 has 5 incarnations running
Neither of those are very costly. Daemons that run in multiple processes or threads share most of their memory segments, so 10 copies of apache takes up very little more memory than just one. > this wouldn't bother me however if i wasn't running into "cannot allocate > memory" errors with my simple perl scripts. is it possible that i'm asking > this little machine to do too much? running "free" tells me that i've got > 1904k of real memory available and 189460k of swap. Is that 1904k "free" in the first row, or the second (-/+ buffers/cache:) row? You should be looking at the second row for useful numbers. Almost all of your memory will be in use under normal circumstances due to the kernel's buffer and cache use. However, those memory areas will be cleared for applications if the need arises. They should not cause memory allocation errors. If you're having problems while you still obviously have swap space left, debug your scripts by printing the size of objects or memory you're trying to allocate before allocation. _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
