From kde-devel Fri Jul 17 09:45:38 2009 From: dunsens () web ! de Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 09:45:38 +0000 To: kde-devel Subject: Re: KDE4 is a memory hog Message-Id: <200907171145.39591.dunsens () web ! de> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-devel&m=124782400121819 Hi, I have now tried, stepped ahead and installed 4.2.4 on my machines (debian- desktop.org backports). I have to say that I am quite pleased. Since the PS3 has a fast swap it is actually capable of running KDE4 sessions. The C3 feels slow, but 512mb seem enough. KWin crashes with my default settings for openchrome via driver though, so i had to disable the composite extension. The PS3 feels a bit sluggish, but it does not really get in your way. You can run Kopete + Firefox + amarok (1.4). This is really o.k. (No youtube of course, shame at adobe). I can also login 3 sessions with an typical work environment on the 1gb ram machines. I get 100-200mb swapping then, but I guess that 4.3 will improve that due to the nvidia issue. Things that I have seen testing with exmap/valgrind --massif: -Fonts can make a huge difference. Parts of my high memory usage seem to be related to using "Free Sans". I am at DejaVu Sans now and it is better. Dolphin shows high heap usage related to libfreetype for example. But it is not really gone - Konsole uses 7mb heap for a one bash tab: 91.09% (6,792,796B) (heap allocation functions) malloc/new/new[], --alloc-fns, etc. ->44.73% (3,335,865B) 0x5CCDCEC: (within /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6.3.18) | ->44.73% (3,335,865B) 0x5CD1EBA: ft_mem_qalloc (in /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6.3.18) | ->44.73% (3,335,865B) 0x5CD3B72: ft_mem_alloc (in /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6.3.18) -Konqueror really is a memory hog although it seems to not be. It uses more memory on the same three tabs/sites test setup than firefox, although exmap even calculates the shared lib usage where it should have a great advantage. This is bad since Firefox has not nearly a as good kde integration. -Kopete takes too much memory. It has a total memory of between 20-24mb here, having 12mb heap: 85.80% (10,692,856B) (heap allocation functions) malloc/new/new[], --alloc- fns, etc. ->24.69% (3,077,240B) 0x4F67DCC: qMalloc(unsigned) (in /usr/lib/libQtCore.so.4.4.3) | ->07.87% (981,434B) 0x4FB1AB8: QString::realloc(int) (in /usr/lib/libQtCore.so.4.4.3) Don't know why, but I guess that could be better... Maybe it is due to the emoticons being cached... -Akonadi takes round about 30 mb. I just kill it if I need to. The always on startup message about migrating the standard ressources gets on my nerves, too, btw.... -Amarok really uses between 60-70 mb on kubuntu here. This does not mean much as heaps seem to be generally larger on kubuntu for some reason. But 70 mb is really bad. I am happy to be able to use KDE4 on my systems now and I am looking forward to use 4.3/4.4. It is really the most advanced *nix desktop imo, so thx for your great work! Cheers, whilo > Hi, > > As I have blogged before here: http://whilos.blogsite.org/?p=102 I have > certain problems about KDE4's increased memory requirements and I am not > alone. > Forgive me the length of the mail, but I have already tried to convince > people that this is a serious issue and have failed in the past, so I have > really tried to get proving information together and am looking forward to > your help. > > The problem: > KDE3's memory usage is roughly on par with Gnome 2 on my systems. The > memory usage for a default session in "free" has always roughly been > 200-300 mb for a chat app + a web browser + maybe some other app. I know > this is not exact, but it gives an idea + my systems with 1gb ram always > worked well with several running KDE3 and Gnome sessions (generally max. > 4), so back then I haven't really worried about ram. My setup consists of a > nfs4 file server for /home + multimedia and on the client-side: a VIA C3 > with 512mb ram, a PS3 with ~200 mb ram, an iBook with 512mb ram, an Athlon > XP 64bit with 1gb ram, a Core 2 Duo laptop with 1gb ram and a kvm machine > with 512mb ram as nxserver for external usage. > They all share the same /home settings, which works great for me. But this > only works if you can keep versions the same on all clients, so all my > machines are running Debian Lenny (i386/ppc) with KDE 3.5 to not stress me > too much. > At the moment I am testing KDE4.2 backported packages from www.debian- > desktop.org (which are backported from experimental for stable) for a > future upgrade path on my laptop. Before I have tested Kubuntu 9.04 which > has had a quite similar memory usage (500-700 free -patches/buffers > [haven't got the exmap modules to compile yet btw]). > I have already worked with svn trunk in the past and ever since I have > first tried 4.0 betas I have recognized a bloated memory usage. In the > beginning I have not cared much, since I only needed one session on my > laptop and it was only my dev environment with debugging stuff + I have > thought it could be my fault. But in the meantime KDE4 has grown stable and > at some point in the future I'd really like to update + I have to, although > the memory situation has not changed. > So either I have to drop KDE from my environment and switch to Gnome/... or > I have to upgrade at least 3 of my machines to get KDE4 running. (512mb for > one session can get you swapping already, not to mention if you use Firefox > with KDE4, which sadly is not memory friendly either) + the 1gb ones for > multisession usage as well. At least the C3 and the PS3 will be to weak and > not upgradable for KDE4's memory usage. I don't know if the iBook is easily > accessible for memory upgrade either by the way. > This is the first time in my personal 5 year Linux desktop history that I > have to upgrade my hardware to keep roughly the same feature set running > (browser+chat+fileserving+multimedia stuff+office) and I don't think I want > to pay all the ram dims and pull the other machines off the network. > > Objections so far: > a) "free is not a benchmarking tool" > Sure but even looking at Lubos memory benchmarking sites free gives roughly > an idea + swapping really occurs. See exmap testing below. > > b) "Kubuntu is a bad distribution for KDE." > I guess they still share a lot with Debian KDE-wise, so Debian packages > should have the problem as well. People in #debian-kde object this > objection, as they basically use unpatchted sources. Memory usage due to > "free" without any X running, but all other services is roughly 40mb so > this cannot be a problem with the lower not-involved software stack on > Debian Lenny here. > Still I have tested with exmap as advised by Lubos. See below. The problem > is that exmap has not really friendly output options, only a GTK interface. > > c) "It works for me on distribution X." > Well I have compared to OpenSuse 11.1 and I can tell you that, since this > is Lubos' distribution, it should compare really well, but it does neither > in stock nor in my settings. The differences are a certain margin in favour > of OpenSUSE (which might be due to i386 against i586 archs/compiler > flags/... for example). But i586 does not run on the C3. > > d) "You have to get new hardware sometimes." > I totally agree that I need new hardware to get new features, e.g. hardware > compositing. But funnily this now starts to work on older machines like the > VIA or iBook and might work once there is a Cell state tracker for > Gallium3d in the future on the PS3 as well. The CPU usage is also > absolutely not the problem unless you watch highdef video. > And I cannot use strigi for example, it always deactivates itself, since > nfs4 is not designed for proper file locking. Plasma as being told by Aaron > is not thought to be the problem either and I don't have many containments > or applets. > > The benchmarking: > You find the screenshots of exmap attached. I have always rebooted between > tests and new users accounts have been freshly created + initialized by a > KDE4 session and tested after a reboot. I have tested both with GDM and > KDM, which gave the funny result that KDE4+GDM on OpenSUSE is less memory > hungry than with KDM?!! > I have loaded 2xweb browser processes (konqueror for kde/firefox for gnome > [which is already a kde friendly choice]) + a terminal window as this > reflects a minimum actually "usable" session for me. > You can clearly see that Gnome is much better and KDE4 takes ~310-360 mb > minimum where Gnome with the hungry Firefox (55mb) takes only 210 mb. Gnome > runs without compositing though (this is an i945 chip btw). Compared to > Lubos' benchmark from 2006 > (http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/desktop_benchmark.html) this is > generally a lot worse, but most likely also a bit more realistic for an > average session. But back then KDE3 has been claimed to be more efficient > and 128mb were enough for a small session. You cannot talk of that anymore, > really not. > > I can do any further testing as you wish and post the results here. > > Cheers, > whilo > > P.S.: I have really tried hard to do it seriously, it has taken me several > hours to setup OpenSUSE+configure it for my network (nfs4,kerberos,...) + > get exmap installed to compare. I really take this serious. > > P.P.S.: Of course I am writing this because I like KDE4 a lot, so don't > take it as moaning. I am simply out of ideas and don't see the issue being > addressed. I have also lost my perspective on caring for my few dev pet > projects in svn, since I am currently not sure if I can even use KDE4 in > the next years. -- My blog: http://whilos.blogsite.org No brain - no headache! >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<