From kde-devel Fri Jun 11 07:32:25 2004 From: Damien Uern Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 07:32:25 +0000 To: kde-devel Subject: Re: kde, xfree & RAM Message-Id: <200406111650.32621.morpheus_2606 () internode ! on ! net> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-devel&m=108693842605654 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 07:23 am, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > On Thursday 10 June 2004 01:28, Michael Pyne wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 June 2004 19:11, Jean-Philippe Schneider wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > In seeing table in ksysguard, i was stomached... For example i saw that > > > kopete takes 40Mo of physical mem and 60 of virtual... > > > Is that normal??? Ithink it is a little bit heavy! > > > If someone could explain me ;) > > > > It's a common misperception, because of the way memory reporting works > > under Linux. > > > > The physical memory and virtual memory reports include not only Kopete, > > but any shared libraries it may be using. This includes glibc, Internet > > support, and KDE too, of course. ;-) > > > > Don't worry, though. Most of that memory is shared by Linux between > > programs. So if you started up Kopete again, it doesn't double the memory > > use. > > > > If you'd like to see how much memory there is left, there should be a > > module for that in ksysguard, or you can just use the free command from > > the shell. > > Find the proces-nr using "ps -aF | grep " then > type "cat proc//status" look for the lines that looks like this: > VmSize: 48620 kB > VmLck: 0 kB > VmRSS: 29844 kB > VmData: 7984 kB > VmStk: 40 kB > VmExe: 40 kB > VmLib: 30956 kB > > This is the result of a "konqueror --preload" on my installation where > debug-info is enable. It tells us that konqueror has linked to 20Mbyte of > libraries, and uses around 8Mbyte itself. VmSize and VmRSS typically > reported by ksysguard or top are useless. > > Btw. Kopete uses about 3 Mbyte of data. > > `Allan Yeah I know the problem is not as bad as ksysguard, top, etc make it out to be. But people posting on the Osnews.com and now slashdot.org threads on this matter (and elsewhere and my own experiences) suggest that KDE is slower than even WinXP on the same hardware. Is it because it's swapping? The RAM usage is too high? Are there too many relocations or other problems on application startup causing slow launch times? Could gcc or the linker be improved to help with launch times? Is the drawing speed of XFree86 too slow and causing perceived sluggishness? I think it's probably a bit of everything, and as Waldo Bastian mentioned on this thread, we need tools to help find the problem areas. User experiences of "slowness" don't really tell us what the problem is, so we need real data. We've got Valgrind and gprof, and there's an X Resources program that tells us how much memory in the X server each app is using : http://www.freedesktop.org/Software/xrestop I might try the latest KDE on my PR233 with 96MB of RAM just to see how useable it is (I've used KDE 2.2.2 on a Celeron 500 with 60MB of RAM and it ran okay; slightly slower than WinME but not too much slower). Damien - -- Bender: OK, but I don't want anyone thinking we're robosexuals. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAyV08XHT3QsqXjYQRAiHlAJ9dw6NvEBuYHXkCPLXZjKw3asOwOQCgiQ0u Wi6gLNCWARGZzjhA/oHrsRQ= =4USB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<