From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <bbc2d23fb7091a3c36f816195a8ae361@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] big pull
From: Fco.J.Ballesteros <nemo@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
From: nemo@plan9.escet.urjc.es
In-Reply-To: <cf560c0a18ae1880cfab7627ed087d8a@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 09:48:22 +0200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: da8afe7c-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> By the way, the problem reported by Nemo before of fossil's
> memory leak has been fixed in the big pull?   Or the problem
> was not recognized?

The incrase in memory size is not too much. When it runs enough days,
the increase in size is comparable to that of cs and some other programs.

Here are some numbers for a certain number of days.

I didnt trace where the memory went, though.

#!/bin/rc
# w swapstats
cat $0 | grep '^[0-9]' | awk -F/ '{print $1}' | graph -a | plot
exit ''
53150/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
53350/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
53857/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54082/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54583/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54735/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54701/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54756/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54810/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54870/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54791/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
54893/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55006/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55096/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55095/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55146/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55304/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55283/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55368/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55458/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55504/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55574/110163 memory 0/160000 swap
55609/110163 memory 0/160000 swap