On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 19:57 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 12:41:56PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > Ever since I updated to post-FC6 rawhide on my x86-64 system, > > gnome-terminal has been unreliable. It occasionally crashes, often at > > strange times. I put it into Bugzilla > > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217378) but have > > not heard any more - how dare people not fix my bug (for free) within 24 > > hours?!? :) > > > > I am curious, though, as to whether I'm really the only one who sees > > this. The problem appears to be related to a memory leak. A quick ps > > on my system shows: > > > > corbet 14974 0.0 5.4 333732 55532 ? Ssl Nov27 0:13 gnome-terminal > > > > A 300MB address space (50MB resident) is a bit on the hefty side, even > > considering that we're talking about a GNOME application here. Doing > > the same thing an hour later shows this: > > > > corbet 14974 0.0 5.0 341236 52032 ? Ssl Nov27 0:14 gnome-terminal > > > > Whereas when I put in the BZ entry I had this: > > > > corbet 14974 0.0 2.3 295520 24288 ? Rsl 07:54 0:02 gnome-terminal > > > > In other words, the thing is growing at a fast and steady rate. > > > > Personally, I think that a terminal emulator should know its place, and > > gnome-terminal has failed to keep within its bounds. Is this something > > special it's doing for me, or is it a wider problem? > > The memory usage reported by 'ps' or 'top' is essentially /useless/ as a > source of information about how much memory is actually used by a program. > > On x86_64 in particular, libraries are mapped into memory on very coarse > granularity, but the actual usage is nowhere near the map size. A freshly > launched gnome-terminal on i386 has a mapped size of 49 MB, while x86_64 > it is 430 MB. The actual resident size though is ~20 MB on i386, or 30 MB > on x86_64, which is pretty reasonable - particularly when you then look > at how much of this is shared vs private mappings. > > The size of private mappings in gnome-terminal appears to be principally > related to number of tabs / windows open & the scrollback size. > > Anyway if you want to examine actual memory maps / usage to get some real > memory figures look at /proc/[PID]/smaps rather tha top/ps. That file's > rather unpleasent to read, so its useful to post-process it > > http://people.redhat.com/berrange/mem-monitor/ > Would it be possible to get this into the next release of gnome-system-monitor? -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list