Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th Nov 2008 22:55 UTC
Editorial Yesterday, a story made its rounds across the internet. It was picked up by many large news websites, and I'm sure it will be quoted by people until eternity. It was published by a large website, looked all fancy, it had multiple pages - it looked like it was really something. However, anyone with even the remotest bit of knowledge knows that the article was a collection of complete and utter bogus.
Thread beginning with comment 337175
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Memory usage
by voidlogic on Thu 13th Nov 2008 04:03 UTC
Member since:

I think a contributing factor to this drama is the way in which windows reports memory that is being used for caching and buffers. I wish they presented in in something along the lines of "free" in UNIX. Here is an example:

total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 3371692 1307396 2064296 0 62924 743724
-/+ buffers/cache: 500748 2870944
Swap: 4192760 0 4192760

(Sorry OS news doesn't support a mono-spaced formatting, like the code tag)

In any case, I also think it is important to make a distinction between memory being used for cache and the memory the kernel is being used for object pools. A system under memory pressure gives up cache freely, so memory should be used aggressively for disk cache. However, memory used for internal object pools is often (read implementation specificly) not available to be made free upon demand. I have gotten the the impression from Vista that they assume that since now days memory is cheap everything should eat up memory for extra pools. This is "just" an impression, since it is not OSS I can't just look ;)

Reply Score: 2