> you should give up thinking there's any real relation between 2.2
> and 2.4. yes, they're both Linux, but their behaviors are essentially
> unrelated.
>
> > total used free shared buffers
> cached
> > Mem: 255340 232444 22896 0 16988
> 93212
> > -/+ buffers/cache: 122244 133096
> > Swap: 208804 0 208804
>
> no swap in use, so there's no problem. except that 22MB is free/wasted.
Then, who is using those 122,244 KB of RAM than cannot be otherwise used for
buffers/cache?
Perhaps I am wrong and that number is the sum of procs memory plus
buffer/caches, but then it should have more free RAM than show in
free/meminfo. And altough cache and buffers are more or less stable, the
reported "used" memory" is still increasing.
What I understand is (no accounting for swap):
cache+buffers == active+inact_dirty+inact_clean.
userland mem == total - (kernel + cache + buffers)
but my reported numbers don't match. I am doing against the maths with the
current situation, and they still worse, buffers/cache have increased in
~4MB but free memory has decreased in ~14MB (with the same workload and
processes):
[gallir@m3d gallir]$ free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 255340 246816 8524 0 4048 110736
-/+ buffers/cache: 132032 123308
Swap: 208804 0 208804
It's preferable to use all available RAM for buffers/cache, but this isn't
the case...
Sorry if I am wrong, I couldn't find more related docs about these changes.
--ricardo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 03 2001 - 13:29:02 EST