[Dr. DDS]

My virtual memory is always 2.3 gig when i turn on my ibook, and after using safari, mail, limewire it goes to 4,5 gig. is it normal?
I'm running 10.4.6, 14" ibook, 1,42ghz, 512 ram, 60gig with 20 gig free.

[Catfish_Man]

virtual memory is close to meaningless. Pay attention to real memory, or how much swapping is going on.

[Dr. DDS]

how can i know how much swapping is going on?

[parsec]

Originally Posted by Dr. DDS

how can i know how much swapping is going on?

I use MenuMeters with the memory meter (I also use the CPU and network meters) in the menubar. It gives information about memory usage.

[Rob van dam]

I was just about to start a thread on a similar topic.I have 4.32 gb of virtual memory is this a good sign or bad?

currently my memory use in activitiy monoitor is

wired-109.59mb
Active-318.18mb
inactive-276.10mb
Used-703.82mb
Free-64.18mb

having 64 mb sounds odd.Do i need more ram as i curently have 768mb.

[bowwowman]

how can i know how much swapping is going on?

open Terminal.app
type in this command: top -u
press enter

Look at the 6th line down from the top of the page, the one that starts with
"VM" and read right to see the number of page-outs..........if it is more than a 2-3K, then you need more REAL ram, or stop using so many ram-hog apps at the same time

[Madrag]

you can get that info with the activity monitor (in the utilities folder).

[TETENAL]

Read this article:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=107918

[Detrius]

Activity monitor says my VM size is about 15GB, but my swap usage dashboard widget says I have 2GB of saw with 1.2GB used.

So, if I had 15GB of RAM, it would be full of inactive stuff, and if I had 1.2GB more RAM than I have now, I wouldn't have a swap file. If I had more than 15GB, it would probably all be empty.

[Dr. DDS]

thanks detrius, but i think i should add more ram anyway

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Dr. DDS

My virtual memory is always 2.3 gig when i turn on my ibook, and after using safari, mail, limewire it goes to 4,5 gig. is it normal?
I'm running 10.4.6, 14" ibook, 1,42ghz, 512 ram, 60gig with 20 gig free.

Yes. It's normal.

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man

Pay attention to real memory, or how much swapping is going on.

I disagree. Pay $100 to max out your RAM and then don't look at it again (unless you're an operating system engineer).

Chris

[Chuckit]

Given that $100 will buy you about a gig with most Macs, your setup sucks if that's all you need to max out your RAM.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Given that $100 will buy you about a gig with most Macs, your setup sucks if that's all you need to max out your RAM.

I have the top of the line 12" G4 Powerbook. It's maxed out at 1.25 GB.

Perhaps instead of recommending maxing out the RAM, I should have just recommended that he buy 1-2 gigs and put it in.

Chris

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by chabig

I disagree. Pay $200-300 to max out your RAM and then don't look at it again (unless you're an operating system engineer).

Chris

T.FTFY. I'm on a PowerBook. My friend's G5 would be more like $1k to max. Personally I'd prefer to just use this machine as long as possible, then spend the money on replacing it.

[chabig]

I had blinders on when thinking about the cost to max out the memory. But if you put 1 gig in there it should make a difference.

Chris

[Dr. DDS]

i'm searching here in brazil where to buy more ram. Apple in brazil is really expensive. In an Apple Store here a 14" ibook g4 costs about 2700 US$!!! So, 1Gb RAM costs around 400 US$. I really want to upgrade my RAM but i will have to search a lot.
Thanks all for the tips

[TETENAL]

You can purchase RAM from a PC dealer if that is cheaper for you. You just have to make sure for yourself that it's the correct specification.

[rotuts]

I did as suggested and went to terminal and found this:










Last login: Fri Jun 9 08:23:02 on console
Welcome to Darwin!
[DFTs-Computer:~] dft% top -u





















Processes: 56 total, 2 running, 54 sleeping... 155 threads 08:49:52
Load Avg: 0.64, 0.47, 0.37 CPU usage: 18.0% user, 18.0% sys, 64.0% idle
SharedLibs: num = 117, resident = 25.7M code, 2.43M data, 8.01M LinkEdit
MemRegions: num = 53218, resident = 575M + 7.86M private, 134M shared
PhysMem: 137M wired, 568M active, 501M inactive, 1.18G used, 71.7M free
VM: 8.46G + 83.6M 174461(0) pageins, 298751(0) pageouts

PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE VSIZE
2318 top 24.5% 0:44.02 1 16 26 360K 484K 2.24M 27.1M
533 Thoth 15.1% 3:38:22 16 129 43641 447M 32.1M 139M 2.51G
220 WindowServ 14.4% 75:06.47 3 347 1006 6.25M- 62.0M+ 53.0M- 240M
2309 mozilla-bi 7.9% 4:03.45 12 200 621 61.3M+ 57.9M 68.4M+ 504M+
0 kernel_tas 4.3% 16:30.86 36 2 3765 27.3M 0K 104M 882M
2312 Activity M 4.3% 0:23.54 2 65 149 3.46M+ 23.3M 16.0M+ 240M
2313 pmTool 2.1% 0:12.59 1 21 28 480K 708K 828K 28.1M
383 UniversalA 1.4% 1:22.65 1 58 100 700K 5.40M 980K 212M
2315 Terminal 1.4% 0:02.73 3 61 141 1.52M 11.0M 6.09M 216M
381 MacLeland 0.7% 3:23.11 5 73 54 364K 2.71M 552K 164M
281 cupsd 0.7% 0:24.27 1 11 38 2.86M 916K 3.04M 36.5M
374 Finder 0.0% 7:25.56 3 477 485 8.14M 52.1M 15.0M 302M
373 SystemUISe 0.0% 6:08.54 2 183 200 1.62M 9.62M 2.75M 216M
365 usb 0.0% 2:21.66 1 13 28 60K 836K 188K 27.3M
2 mach_init 0.0% 0:35.84 2 189 18 96K 396K 168K 18.2M
207 SecuritySe 0.0% 0:35.56 1 86 30 384K 1.16M 608K 28.2M
154 update 0.0% 0:29.64 1 9 16 16K 380K 48K 17.6M
372 Dock 0.0% 0:21.59 2 104 224 1.14M 36.0M 3.28M 236M
380 LCCDaemon 0.0% 0:14.39 2 73 107 2.24M 2.43M 1.36M 206M
382 MacLelandM 0.0% 0:12.65 1 57 108 704K 5.96M 1.15M 212M
238 ATSServer 0.0% 0:09.67 3 83 444 788K 10.4M 2.74M 121M
182 coreservic 0.0% 0:07.08 1 91 258 5.43M 23.5M 11.4M 74.3M
389 ntpd 0.0% 0:06.54 1 10 19 60K 436K 148K 17.9M
283 udmarket 0.0% 0:04.87 4 59 72 140K 1.74M 380K 59.5M
87 kextd 0.0% 0:04.34 2 17 29 1.29M 824K 1.25M 28.9M



nnote that Thoth uses a lot of VM sometimes it won't open a new NG because it says out of memory. but at those times the RAM is not al being used.

what does that mean and can I increase the VM? Id rather not buy more RAm for the dual G4 1ghz its at 1.25 now as I await an intelmac this fall

this only happens with Thoth it seems to have a real appetite for VM
cheers and thanks

rotuts

[kick52]

Originally Posted by rotuts

Processes: 56 total, 2 running, 54 sleeping... 155 threads 08:49:52
Load Avg: 0.64, 0.47, 0.37 CPU usage: 18.0% user, 18.0% sys, 64.0% idle
SharedLibs: num = 117, resident = 25.7M code, 2.43M data, 8.01M LinkEdit
MemRegions: num = 53218, resident = 575M + 7.86M private, 134M shared
PhysMem: 137M wired, 568M active, 501M inactive, 1.18G used, 71.7M free
VM: 8.46G + 83.6M 174461(0) pageins, 298751(0) pageouts

wow you have 2.0gb of ram right? and you have 20k pageouts? i have 0.5gb and 120 pageouts.

[rotuts]

I have 1.25GB of RAM and i guess Im trying to learn what pageouts mean and if I can adjust the VM or is that automatically calculated by the OS

the last I thought about it it was.

so what does pageouts mean?

cheers again

rotuts

[rotuts]

replying to myself (very gauche):

"Page ins/outs" refers to the number of times Mac OS X has moved information between RAM and disk space.

from the article above I missed. Im not concered about speed as this implies my mac is trading things back and forth a lot with Thoth.

I just would like it to not run out of VM. or be able to add to VM w/o getting more RAM

im guessing I can't. buy why use so much VM?

chheers

[dimmer]

Until you run out of HD space, you won't run out of VM space --- things may get hella slow as you try to get there (hopefully, at least!) Just make sure you've got enough free disk space for VM to grow as required.

[rotuts]

well I think its more complicated than that. I have plenty of HD space, but still the VM is around 7GB. it does grow but thoth eventually runs out of space, even though some real RAM is not used.

thanks

[newtech]

Originally Posted by rotuts

well I think its more complicated than that. I have plenty of HD space, but still the VM is around 7GB. it does grow but thoth eventually runs out of space, even though some real RAM is not used.

thanks

OS X is incredibly unsophsticated about VM. In general X sets VM to 2X RAM +1MB and rarely allocates more VM. VM is sickeningly SLOW, if you see the "beachball" cursor you are waiting on VM most likely.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by newtech

OS X is incredibly unsophsticated about VM. In general X sets VM to 2X RAM +1MB and rarely allocates more VM. VM is sickeningly SLOW, if you see the "beachball" cursor you are waiting on VM most likely.

I think you're confusing Classic MacOS VM with OS X VM. Classic set aside a fixed amount of VM. OS X will always use as much as it needs, without regard to how much actual RAM you have. My VM size right now is just over 8GB, yet I have only 1.25 GB of RAM.

Chris

[newtech]

Originally Posted by chabig

I think you're confusing Classic MacOS VM with OS X VM. Classic set aside a fixed amount of VM. OS X will always use as much as it needs, without regard to how much actual RAM you have. My VM size right now is just over 8GB, yet I have only 1.25 GB of RAM.

Chris

Classic VM and X VM work nearly identically, X "can" allocate more VM but rarely does, classic was superior in that you could turn VM off.

VM is in NO WAY a resonable substitute for REAL RAM!!!

[chabig]

Originally Posted by newtech

Classic VM and X VM work nearly identically, X "can" allocate more VM but rarely does, classic was superior in that you could turn VM off.

VM is in NO WAY a resonable substitute for REAL RAM!!!

I respectfully disagree. Both VM systems substitute hard drive space for RAM (as do all virtual memory systems), but beyond that OS X's memory management is far more advanced and overall superior. Furthermore, I don't think I can say I've ever seen an OS X machine where VM was just 2 times the installed RAM. I think 4-6 times is more common.

Here's is Apple's VM overview:

http://www.devworld.apple.com/docume...section_5.html

Chris

[newtech]

VM made/makes sense back when RAM was is limited to >256MB. In machines with up to 16GB there is NO GOOD REASON to ever use VM. VM only encourages software bloat and lazy programming at the expense of overall system performance.

Anyone who has used Photoshop on a machine with too little RAM will tell you VM is not a very practical thing. VM is in the same vein as emulation, that is fine in a pinch but no way to operate on a regular basis.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by newtech

VM made/makes sense back when RAM was is limited to >256MB. In machines with up to 16GB there is NO GOOD REASON to ever use VM. VM only encourages software bloat and lazy programming at the expense of overall system performance.

There is a GREAT reason to use VM--it's cheaper. Have you priced 16GB of RAM lately?

Chris

[bowwowman]

Originally Posted by chabig

There is a GREAT reason to use VM--it's cheaper. Have you priced 16GB of RAM lately?

Chris

Well, most people dont NEED 16GB.......

But anyway, replacing your HD's costs money too excessive swapping will kill a HD MUCH faster

And then there is all the lost productivity from waiting on the beachball to go away..........

U do da math

[Mithras]

Originally Posted by newtech

VM made/makes sense back when RAM was is limited to >256MB. In machines with up to 16GB there is NO GOOD REASON to ever use VM. VM only encourages software bloat and lazy programming at the expense of overall system performance.

Anyone who has used Photoshop on a machine with too little RAM will tell you VM is not a very practical thing. VM is in the same vein as emulation, that is fine in a pinch but no way to operate on a regular basis.

Take an operating systems course or two, and then try to make this argument again. Virtual Memory is an extremely effective tool for solving all kinds of problems. Read the Wikipedia article for some basic information.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by newtech

Anyone who has used Photoshop on a machine with too little RAM will tell you VM is not a very practical thing. VM is in the same vein as emulation, that is fine in a pinch but no way to operate on a regular basis.

No, seriously, as a long-time Photoshop user (since sys. 7.1) let me say that VM is much, much preferable to an "out of memory" message that precludes you from being able to even save the work you just did. I don't miss the days of having to re-allocate my meagre RAM to whichever RAM-hungry app I needed to run at the time, and still deal with those "out of memory" messages, that usually resulted in a re-start. OS X's VM management is light-years ahead os OS 9's. Period.

A Photoshop professional would figure the amount of RAM he or she would need in order to not suffer from constant swapping throughout the day, but to suggest that one use PS without any VM is not correct.

[wadesworld]

Classic VM and X VM work nearly identically, X "can" allocate more VM but rarely does, classic was superior in that you could turn VM off.

Quit trying to sound like you have a clue of what you're talking about. You don't.

[wadesworld]

VM: 8.46G + 83.6M 174461(0) pageins, 298751(0) pageouts


wow you have 2.0gb of ram right? and you have 20k pageouts? i have 0.5gb and 120 pageouts.
__________________

The number of page-in's and page-out's is not always a huge cause for concern. It depends on how many applications you have open, etc.

The number to keep an eye on is the number in parenthesis after the page in and page outs. If you frequently see a value in there, it means your machine is in the process of swapping. If you see that a lot, it's an indication you don't have enough memory.

[Cadaver]

Originally Posted by newtech

Classic VM and X VM work nearly identically, X "can" allocate more VM but rarely does...

Not even close to correct.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by wadesworld

The number of page-in's and page-out's is not always a huge cause for concern. It depends on how many applications you have open, etc.

The number to keep an eye on is the number in parenthesis after the page in and page outs. If you frequently see a value in there, it means your machine is in the process of swapping. If you see that a lot, it's an indication you don't have enough memory.

The other good way of checking the rate is just to measure pageouts per day.

Code:
Palantir:~ david$ vm_stat
<snipped>
Pageouts:                     165660.
<snipped>
Palantir:~ david$ uptime
 1:13  up 2 days,  1:21, 5 users, load averages: 1.27 1.00 0.74

I need more ram :/

[kick52]

currently, 3.42gb of vm , 0 pageouts