LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 07-13-2006, 08:40 AM   #16
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Central Florida 20 minutes from Disney World
Distribution: Slackware®
Posts: 13,956
Blog Entries: 46

Rep: Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185Reputation: 3185

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxhippy
thanks for all the info. My current setup of a 486 kernel on a P1 works fine....I just don't like how most of my memory is being used according to top. I was told that a 386 kernel would use less memory. I do have a memtest program on a live system rescue cd that I'll use to see if alls ok if I put in another RAM chip.

Could I mess up my pc permanently if I put in too much RAM?
Hi,

You are not interpreting top properly! Why do you think the linux os is multitasking or processing? The memory management for linux is great! Would you rather have your memory sit idle rather than active?

Who ever told you a i386 kernel would use less memory had to be talking about the kernel image not the management. The memory management for the i386 is not the same as the i486. Another major difference between the i386 and i486 is the co-processor is integrated on the i486 with the i386 the floating point co-processor is a separate chip.

The i486 pipeline is the speed advantage for the i486, the instructions sets are the same for the i386 or i486. The fourth generation i486 has a major speed advantage over the i386 because of the pipeline.

You should read some background information about the intel series processors, check out processors.

Hearsay will only get you into trouble!
 
Old 07-13-2006, 03:31 PM   #17
linuxhippy
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Distribution: Xubuntu, Mythbuntu, Lubuntu, Picuntu, Mint 18.1, Debian Jessie
Posts: 1,207

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 47
I was thinking I was misinterpreting memory in top wrong since I've been hearing for years that Linux is good with memory management. I've noticed in top that the memory always increases but never decreases again till you reboot...get the info on the memory from top before startx, after startx, and after closing startx and you will see what I mean. The memory must refresh once startx closes, but top doesn't reflect that.
 
Old 07-13-2006, 03:52 PM   #18
Voltar
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Bakersfield, California
Distribution: CentOS 5.3, FreeBSD 7.2, Fedora 11
Posts: 83

Rep: Reputation: 15
Not 100% sure, but I think it's just the way Linux's memory management is. It keeps everything it cache incase you need it again, and if not flushes it for something else requesting memory.

Not 100% sure though, but that's how it was explained to me when I was a n00b.
 
Old 07-13-2006, 04:01 PM   #19
nykey
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 360

Rep: Reputation: 30
Yes, it's something like that. And when too much memory is requested at once, like running 2 or more programs which require alot of memory at once, the old cached data is transfered to the swap. I have 512MB DDR 333Mhz PC2700 RAM with 1024MB swap space and in all my time using Linux the max use of my swap space was 1MB, and that was when I was compiling glibc from source, using OpenOffice, music, IM, copying some files from my NTFS partition and running another program which name I can't remember now. And I've never felt that my computer moves slower than it should. On Window$ I did feel my memory was not managed properly, and there too had 1024MB fixed Pagefile which was used at least half mostly all the time.
 
Old 07-13-2006, 08:38 PM   #20
linuxhippy
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Distribution: Xubuntu, Mythbuntu, Lubuntu, Picuntu, Mint 18.1, Debian Jessie
Posts: 1,207

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 47
guess that's why Win experiences the blue screen of death and Linux keeps on humming away! Anyway, I added an old 128 MB SDRAM stick I had and now it doesn't cache as often as it was with 256 MB physical memory now. Thanks for all the help!
 
Old 07-13-2006, 08:44 PM   #21
nykey
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 360

Rep: Reputation: 30
Exactly. So don't waste time worring about memory management as that really isn't a problem with Linux... When and if you'll get to 512MB or more you will hardly need a swap space at all.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Oignon routing: Mix and mix cascades xpucto Linux - Networking 6 07-05-2006 01:01 PM
An odd reiserfs booting problem in a special situation may be about SUSE10's reiserfs ayal Linux - Newbie 7 11-15-2005 08:36 AM
15 yr old + linux DO mix qalimas LinuxQuestions.org Member Success Stories 14 10-14-2004 01:31 AM
Add ReiserFS package destroys non-ReiserFS partitions smirk Mandriva 0 03-24-2004 08:20 PM
RH 8 kernels and their relation to 'stock' kernels psweetma Linux - Distributions 1 03-29-2003 11:46 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:43 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration