* Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been trying to figure out why some periodic scripts consume so much > memory. I've narrowed it down to sort(1). > > At first, I thought the scripts were using it inefficiently, feeding it > more data than was really needed. Then I discovered this: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~% (sleep 10 | sort) & (sleep 5 ; top -o res | grep sort) > [1] 66024 > 66024 des 1 -8 5 54796K 52680K piperd 1 0:00 0.88% sort > > That's right - sort(1) consumes 50+ MB of memory doing *nothing*. > > (roughly half that on a 32-bit box) > > Something is rotten in the state of GNU...
On my i386 box it spends 27M, but when I replace `sort' with `sed', without any arguments, it's only 1.4 MB. I tried this on RELENG_6. I can also reproduce this on Linux. -- Ed Schouten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WWW: http://g-rave.nl/
pgpCYWNtuzaHI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
