Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #59667 > unrolled thread

Mavericks - diskimages-helper

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Mavericks - diskimages-helper Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-24 08:43 -0400
    Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-24 16:16 +0000
    Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-24 18:06 +0000
    Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-05-24 17:50 -0400
      Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-24 18:52 -0400
    Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-24 22:21 +0000
      Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-24 18:45 -0400
        Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-26 05:58 +0000
        Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-05-27 08:49 -0700
          Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-28 02:42 +0000
    Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-24 18:46 -0400
    Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-05-24 15:48 -0700
      Re: Mavericks - diskimages-helper Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-24 18:57 -0400

#59667 — Mavericks - diskimages-helper

Puzzled by Mavericks memory stats (Menu Meters shows one thing, Activity 
Monitor something else) I've been watching it a bit closely.

In Activity Monitor|Memory

diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.

App Memory is at a whoppinger 13.91 GB.  I only have a few, not 
voracious apps loaded... (Mail, T-bird, calendar, reminders, messages, 
Chrome.

http://tinyurl.com/oqkuny6

http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b

Anyone else seeing huge allocations like this?

Current up time is 8+ days.

i7, 32 GB, 10.9.3

-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#59669

On 2014-05-24, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> Puzzled by Mavericks memory stats (Menu Meters shows one thing, Activity 
> Monitor something else) I've been watching it a bit closely.
>
> In Activity Monitor|Memory
>
> diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.
>
> App Memory is at a whoppinger 13.91 GB.  I only have a few, not 
> voracious apps loaded... (Mail, T-bird, calendar, reminders, messages, 
> Chrome.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/oqkuny6
>
> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
>
> Anyone else seeing huge allocations like this?
>
> Current up time is 8+ days.
>
> i7, 32 GB, 10.9.3

Dual 2.8GHz quad-core Xeon Mac Pro with 14 GB of RAM, running 10.9
latest, uptime 8+ days as well. diskimages-helper is using 4.7 MB.
Application Memory is at 7.55 GB with these applications running: 

Activity Monitor
Finder
iTunes
LaunchBar
Mail
Messages
PopChar
RealPlayer Downloader
Safari
Terminal
TextWrangler

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59670

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> writes:

> Puzzled by Mavericks memory stats (Menu Meters shows one thing, Activity 
> Monitor something else)

Probably a difference is how inactive memory is tallied.

> In Activity Monitor|Memory
> 
> diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.

Something seems wrong here...

It's only using 13MB for me, although I only have one image
mounted at the moment.  Mounting a couple more produces two
more instances of it, at 13.7MB and 11.8MB.  The disk image
sizes are 7.0MB, 238.8MB, and 235.2MB.

> App Memory is at a whoppinger 13.91 GB.  I only have a few, not
> voracious apps loaded... (Mail, T-bird, calendar, reminders,
> messages, Chrome.

Mine is 4.01GB, with MailMate, Safari (many windows), Terminal,
and Activity Monitor running.  Roughly 2.5GB of that is eaten at
startup by all the various extra junk I've added.

> Current up time is 8+ days.
> 
> i7, 32 GB, 10.9.3

Mine is four days, and 8GB.

Billy Y..
-- 
        sub     #'9+1   ,r0             ; convert ascii byte
	add     #9.+1   ,r0             ; to an integer
	bcc     20$                     ; not a number

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59672

On 14-05-24 08:43, Alan Browne wrote:

> diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.

Is it possible that it is mapping to memory some .dmg or .iso you
mounted ? I suspect memory caching when there is lots of free memory.

Note that very few processes are able to release memory after it has
been allocated to them. So once a process has requested  hige chunk of
memory, that pool remains allocated to the process (a "free()" doesn't
release memory back to the OS, it releases it back to the process free
memory to be used by the next malloc() in that process).

So some large allocation done some time ago would remain in the process'
memory space until the process is restarted. (lack of RAM would then
cause that memory to page out to disk).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59678

On 2014.05.24, 17:50 , JF Mezei wrote:
> On 14-05-24 08:43, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.
>
> Is it possible that it is mapping to memory some .dmg or .iso you
> mounted ? I suspect memory caching when there is lots of free memory.

Not that I see.  I have, other than the sys disk, 4 USB 3.0 disks 
(single volumes) and a RAM disk loaded.

Unloading the RAM disk seems to get rid of it ... <blush> ... but I 
didn't notice these sorts of memory loads when 10.9."0" came out.


>
> Note that very few processes are able to release memory after it has
> been allocated to them. So once a process has requested  hige chunk of
> memory, that pool remains allocated to the process (a "free()" doesn't
> release memory back to the OS, it releases it back to the process free
> memory to be used by the next malloc() in that process).

I've written a somewhat memory voracious GPS data processor that 
allocates 200 - 500 MB at a time - and releases it in an orderly fashion 
with no issues (the mem used goes down between runs while waiting for 
the next go.
>
> So some large allocation done some time ago would remain in the process'
> memory space until the process is restarted. (lack of RAM would then
> cause that memory to page out to disk).

It appears the RAM disk I'm using doesn't return memory after files are 
deleted and trash-emptied.

-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59673

In message <BbadnYSfzY9GDh3OnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com> 
  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b

Swap used: 0

The only number that matters.



-- 
'I thought dwarfs didn't believe in devils and demons and stuff like
that.' 'That's true, but... we're not sure if they know.'

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59675

On 2014.05.24, 18:21 , Lewis wrote:
> In message <BbadnYSfzY9GDh3OnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
>    Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
>
> Swap used: 0
>
> The only number that matters.

I've had the same thought - to the point that it's "good" that the swap 
is 0, but not that it's all that matters.


-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59692

In message <9KmdnaeQR5KavBzOnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@giganews.com> 
  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.05.24, 18:21 , Lewis wrote:
>> In message <BbadnYSfzY9GDh3OnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
>>    Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
>>
>> Swap used: 0
>>
>> The only number that matters.

> I've had the same thought - to the point that it's "good" that the swap 
> is 0, but not that it's all that matters.

If swap is 0 then yes, it is the only number that matters.

If swap is not 0, then the other numbers matter.

-- 
Get in there you big furry oaf! I don't care what you smell!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59749

In article <9KmdnaeQR5KavBzOnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2014.05.24, 18:21 , Lewis wrote:
> > In message <BbadnYSfzY9GDh3OnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
> >    Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
> >
> > Swap used: 0
> >
> > The only number that matters.
> 
> I've had the same thought - to the point that it's "good" that the swap 
> is 0, but not that it's all that matters.

Mavericks can eat a lot of battery doing its compression trick without 
the disk swap count ever going up.  You have to check the new 
compression stats too.

The absolute number for disk swap is rather ambiguous too.  I don't 
think OS X can do it now, but better VMs implementations will 
preemptively synchronize idle RAM and the swap file in the background.  
If there's later a sudden demand for memory, those synchronized pages 
can be instantly put to new uses without a disk hit.  This causes the 
swap files to grow a bit but the investment may greatly improve future 
performance.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59782

In message <mcmurtrie-BF5F89.08492027052014@news.sonic.net> 
  Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
> In article <9KmdnaeQR5KavBzOnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>  Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>> On 2014.05.24, 18:21 , Lewis wrote:
>> > In message <BbadnYSfzY9GDh3OnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>
>> >    Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> >> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
>> >
>> > Swap used: 0
>> >
>> > The only number that matters.
>> 
>> I've had the same thought - to the point that it's "good" that the swap 
>> is 0, but not that it's all that matters.

> Mavericks can eat a lot of battery doing its compression trick without 
> the disk swap count ever going up.

You're making things up again.

-- 
CURSIVE WRITING DOES NOT MEAN WHAT I THINK IT DOES Bart chalkboard Ep.
2F11

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59676

On 2014.05.24, 08:43 , Alan Browne wrote:
>
> Puzzled by Mavericks memory stats (Menu Meters shows one thing, Activity
> Monitor something else) I've been watching it a bit closely.
>
> In Activity Monitor|Memory
>
> diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.
>
> App Memory is at a whoppinger 13.91 GB.  I only have a few, not
> voracious apps loaded... (Mail, T-bird, calendar, reminders, messages,
> Chrome.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/oqkuny6
>
> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
>
> Anyone else seeing huge allocations like this?
>
> Current up time is 8+ days.
>
> i7, 32 GB, 10.9.3

er, 24 GB of ram, ... not that it's all that important for the matter at 
hand.


-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59677

In article <BbadnYSfzY9GDh3OnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> Puzzled by Mavericks memory stats (Menu Meters shows one thing, Activity 
> Monitor something else) I've been watching it a bit closely.
> 
> In Activity Monitor|Memory
> 
> diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.
> 
> App Memory is at a whoppinger 13.91 GB.  I only have a few, not 
> voracious apps loaded... (Mail, T-bird, calendar, reminders, messages, 
> Chrome.
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/oqkuny6
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
> 
> Anyone else seeing huge allocations like this?
> 
> Current up time is 8+ days.
> 
> i7, 32 GB, 10.9.3

"Memory" is quite ambiguous.

That could be address space not backed by RAM or it could be that it 
does have that much RAM because nothing else has bothered to ask for it 
back.

I don't know about Activity Monitor, but 'vm_stat 1' will show how much 
the disk and compressor is being used.


The "MEMORY PRESSURE" graph is mostly broken.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#59679

On 2014.05.24, 18:48 , Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> In article <BbadnYSfzY9GDh3OnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>   Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> Puzzled by Mavericks memory stats (Menu Meters shows one thing, Activity
>> Monitor something else) I've been watching it a bit closely.
>>
>> In Activity Monitor|Memory
>>
>> diskimages-helper is showing a whopping 7.81 GB of memory.
>>
>> App Memory is at a whoppinger 13.91 GB.  I only have a few, not
>> voracious apps loaded... (Mail, T-bird, calendar, reminders, messages,
>> Chrome.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/oqkuny6
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/o47a55b
>>
>> Anyone else seeing huge allocations like this?
>>
>> Current up time is 8+ days.
>>
>> i7, 32 GB, 10.9.3
>
> "Memory" is quite ambiguous.
>
> That could be address space not backed by RAM or it could be that it
> does have that much RAM because nothing else has bothered to ask for it
> back.
>
> I don't know about Activity Monitor, but 'vm_stat 1' will show how much
> the disk and compressor is being used.

That lists... in 4K pages.  My little head can't handle it right now.

(Helped someone move today and I'm a few beers and a glass of wine into 
the evening - I'll study those tomorrow or something...)

>
>
> The "MEMORY PRESSURE" graph is mostly broken.

In my case per the posted JPG's or generally?

It's always green on my iMac but often goes yellow on my SO's 2 GB MBA.


-- 
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web