From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/5190 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark Borges Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Gnus Memory usage Date: 21 Feb 1996 10:59:44 -0700 Organization: CIRES, University of Colorado Sender: mdb@cdc.noaa.gov Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035145830 32098 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:30:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:30:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@ifi.uio.no Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA12984 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 1996 10:45:14 -0800 Original-Received: from cdc.noaa.gov ([128.138.218.210]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Wed, 21 Feb 1996 18:59:49 +0100 Original-Received: from revelle by cdc.noaa.gov (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA13627; Wed, 21 Feb 1996 10:59:45 -0700 Original-Received: by revelle (5.0) id AA26938; Wed, 21 Feb 1996 10:59:46 -0700 Original-To: Steven L Baur X-Attribution: mb In-Reply-To: Steven L Baur's message of 20 Feb 1996 22:55:11 -0800 Original-Lines: 61 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:5190 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:5190 >> On 20 Feb 1996 22:55:11 -0800, >> Steven L Baur(sb) wrote: sb> I'd love to have a Gnus stay down at only 8 MB, but let me quantify my sb> numbers. Me too. sb> The burning question is what does everyone consider acceptable and sb> normal Gnus+X?Emacs memory usage? This is on a $uname -a SunOS suomi 5.3 Generic_101318-70 sun4m sparc with numbers reported by top(1). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ typical xemacs (both sgnus, VM running): PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 25325 mdb -14 0 14M 12M sleep 4:38 1.43% 13.69% xemacs-19.14-b ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ barebones(*) xemacs (xemacs -nw -q) PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 15894 mdb 34 0 7004K 4848K stop 0:01 0.00% 0.00% xemacs-19.14-b (*) You could build a smaller xemacs now by excluding toolbar etc. support at compile-time, I think. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ minimal xemacs (xemacs -q): PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 15597 mdb 34 0 7232K 5700K sleep 0:03 2.24% 1.75% xemacs-19.14-b ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ minimal xemacs + my .emacs (efs,dmacro,fill-adapt,jka-compr,etc. required): PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 15597 mdb 34 0 8436K 7032K sleep 0:12 11.18% 0.00% xemacs-19.14-b ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ minimal xemacs + my .emacs + sgnus: PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 15597 mdb 34 0 11M 9352K sleep 0:37 3.30% 2.52% xemacs-19.14-b ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ immediately after quitting sgnus: PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 15597 mdb 34 0 10M 9076K sleep 0:38 2.36% 0.00% xemacs-19.14-b ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ However, if I kill off all the buffers and let xemacs run overnight, when I return I the morning I find the RES size has shrunk to something a bit less than 5Mb. -mb-