Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:39:54 -0500
From:      Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
To:        Jesse Guardiani <jesse@wingnet.net>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: `top` process memory usage: SIZE vs RES
Message-ID:  <20030912163954.GC61528@dan.emsphone.com>
In-Reply-To: <bjsjdd$vgh$2@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <bjqs64$6i9$1@sea.gmane.org> <20030911231742.GA61528@dan.emsphone.com> <bjsjdd$vgh$2@sea.gmane.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Sep 12), Jesse Guardiani said:
> Dan Nelson wrote:
> > In the last episode (Sep 11), Jesse Guardiani said:
> >  
> >> 2.) What, exactly, is RES? `man top` describes it as this:
> >>     "RES is the current amount of resident memory", but does
> >>     that mean RES is included in SIZE? Or does that mean that
> >>     RES should be counted in addition to SIZE?
> > 
> > RES the amount of SIZE that it currently in core
> 
> OK. To clarify, you mean core kernel memory here?
> If so, how is that significant? Why should I care?
> 
> In other words, why would I ever want to know that?

core meaning physical memory; user memory in this case.  Processes can
lock kernel memory, but there's no easy way of listing that (it's
usually a small amount held in pipe or socket buffers and is
short-lived). The name "core" came from when memory bits were ferrite
rings magnetized by wires running through them.

http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/core.html

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@allantgroup.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030912163954.GC61528>