On 06/10/2011 09:07 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
Yes, whatever happened to the *NIX philosophy of simple non-complex programs that didHi Lennart, systemd is eating a lot more memory than any other init process I ever played with. Granted, systemd does a bit more that "typical" init, but I think using *eleven plus megabytes* of malloced space is a bit much. systemctl --all shows 258 units total on my machine, thus systemd uses ~40 *KILO*bytes of state per unit? I understand your desire to replace everything by systemd. I really do. syslogd, klogd, mount, fsck, and a dozen other things I forget or don't know. It's called "featuritis". Now I hear about plans to incorporate ConsoleKit into it (hearsay, so maybe it's not true). Look where it is now: Top: Mem total:2035840 anon:431208 map:78924 free:419084 slab:91624 buf:108040 cache:942336 dirty:196 write:0 Swap total:4095996 free:4095996 PID VSZ VSZRW RSS (SHR)*DIRTY (SHR) STACK COMMAND 1818 624m 365m 185m 13472 155m 64 224 /usr/lib/firefox-4/firefox 1816 433m 189m 166m 17248 142m 0 204 evolution 1257 53672 40400 22664 6004 18336 4176 132 /usr/bin/Xorg 1 15384 11856 13664 1340 11752 0 132 /sbin/init ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ 11.7 megs of malloc space 1839 275m 40224 24208 10572 11020 0 132 /usr/bin/gnome-terminal 1713 202m 45284 20308 9736 9604 576 132 /usr/libexec/xfce4/panel-plugins/xfce4-mixer-plugin 1843 171m 9448 20264 10012 8440 344 204 xchat 1770 152m 55672 19412 10972 6108 0 132 nautilus It's the *fourth* largest process on my system! # ldd `which systemd` linux-gate.so.1 => (0x00a6b000) libselinux.so.1 => /lib/libselinux.so.1 (0x414f6000) libdbus-1.so.3 => /lib/libdbus-1.so.3 (0x41bc1000) libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x0019a000) libudev.so.0 => /lib/libudev.so.0 (0x422c9000) libwrap.so.0 => /lib/libwrap.so.0 (0x420fa000) libpam.so.0 => /lib/libpam.so.0 (0x420e6000) libaudit.so.1 => /lib/libaudit.so.1 (0x420cc000) libcap.so.2 => /lib/libcap.so.2 (0x4152f000) librt.so.1 => /lib/librt.so.1 (0x00be8000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x00295000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x00276000) libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x00af6000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00f68000) libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x0095c000) libattr.so.1 => /lib/libattr.so.1 (0x420c5000) Why does systemd link against libpam? systemd does logins now, not /bin/login or gdm or ...? libattr? Does it mean it requires filesystem which implements extended attributes? If not, why does it use libattr then? libwrap? systemd is a network application now too? libaudit? What systemd has in common with audit? libdbus?... this is a lost battle I guess... I propose to stop for a second and optimize systemd down instead of trying to add even more bells and whistles to it. Or else you'll soon end up linking against every /lib/lib*.so* At the very least, I would like to see its memory consumption to go down substantially. It is an *init replacement*, not the replacement for everything. One of init's goal is to be *simple* and *stable*. Every new feature you add and library you link against works against that goal. To be honest, I doubt the wisdom of implementing service manager as an init process. There is no inherent reason why it has to be init - you can run it as *a child of init*, and keep init very simple. Then, if service manager would crash, at least it doesn't take system down with it... their job well. It has seemed to serve well since the 70's. --
Stephen Clark NetWolves Sr. Software Engineer III Phone: 813-579-3200 Fax: 813-882-0209 Email: steve.clark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netwolves.com |
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel