On Mon, 2001-12-03 at 11:34, dman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 10:13:43AM -0600, Michael Heldebrant wrote:
> | On Mon, 2001-12-03 at 03:04, Holger Rauch wrote:
> | > On 2 Dec 2001, Michael Heldebrant wrote:
> | >
> | > > IIRC from the Understanding the Linux Kernel book by O'Reilly, linux
> |
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 10:13:43AM -0600, Michael Heldebrant wrote:
| On Mon, 2001-12-03 at 03:04, Holger Rauch wrote:
| > On 2 Dec 2001, Michael Heldebrant wrote:
| >
| > > IIRC from the Understanding the Linux Kernel book by O'Reilly, linux
| > > doesn't actually worry about memory until you act
Lo, on , December 2, Michael Heldebrant did write:
> IIRC from the Understanding the Linux Kernel book by O'Reilly, linux
> doesn't actually worry about memory until you actually use it. I'm not
> sure if a malloc counts as using it for storing data since I'm no C
> programmer but unless you actu
On Mon, 2001-12-03 at 03:04, Holger Rauch wrote:
> Hi Michael!
>
> First of all, thanks for your hint!
>
> On 2 Dec 2001, Michael Heldebrant wrote:
>
> > IIRC from the Understanding the Linux Kernel book by O'Reilly, linux
> > doesn't actually worry about memory until you actually use it. I'm n
At 1007390900s since epoch (12/03/01 03:48:20 -0500 UTC), Holger Rauch wrote:
> > only 222,688 K are being used by actual processes on the system.
>
> Ok. But where do the 600 MB of main memory that Oracle uses fit in
> there? Are they reported as cached memory?
I'm not certain, but I would guess
Hi Michael!
First of all, thanks for your hint!
On 2 Dec 2001, Michael Heldebrant wrote:
> IIRC from the Understanding the Linux Kernel book by O'Reilly, linux
> doesn't actually worry about memory until you actually use it. I'm not
> sure if a malloc counts as using it for storing data since I
Hi Jason!
Thanks a lot for your quick and informative reply!
On Sun, 2 Dec 2001, Jason Healy wrote:
> [...]
> Looks right to me. According to free, your system has 2GB of memory,
> most of which is 'used'. However, looking at the next line, you'll
> see that 1.8GB of that is actually free for
On Sun, 2001-12-02 at 14:28, Jason Healy wrote:
> > In order to find out whether this is right, I wrote a small test
> > program that continuously does a malloc() for 10 MB every 5 secs until the
> > system runs out of memory. Strangely enough, it didn't.
>
> How long did you run it for? To use
At 1007344595s since epoch (12/02/01 14:56:35 -0500 UTC), Holger Rauch wrote:
> That said, the free cmd should report that approx. 1.4 GB of main memory
> should still be available. However, what I get is:
>
> total used free sharedbuffers cached
> Mem: 2
9 matches
Mail list logo
