On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 16:08:03 +0200
Christian Schulte <c...@schulte.it> wrote:
> On 10/15/24 15:09, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 02:35:03PM +0200, Christian Schulte wrote:
> >> On 10/15/24 12:45, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:28:20PM +0200, Christian Schulte
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> On 10/15/24 12:09, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> >>>>> On 2024-10-15, Zé Loff <zel...@zeloff.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 10:14:42AM +0200, Christian Schulte
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> ulimit -d `ulimit -aH | grep data | awk '{print $2}'`
> >>>>>>> ulimit -n `ulimit -aH | grep nofiles | awk '{print $2}'`
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ulimit -d `ulimit -dH` etc... but then there's no point setting
> >>>>> a separate hard limit in login.conf.
> >>>>
> >>>> Of course. I am the only user on that system and the only limits
> >>>> I want "my" xsession to be in effect on that system are the hard
> >>>> limits setup by the kernel. Those make the system swap for no
> >>>> apparent reasons. So. Why is this thing swapping?
> >>>
> >>> Because you are out of memory (most probably the usual amd64
> >>> problem of running out of dma reachable memory and the pagedaemon
> >>> going berserk about that). You have plenty of ram just in the
> >>> wrong spot.
> >>
> >> According to the readings of top(1) or vmstat(8) I am not hitting
> >> any physical RAM limits. Still. The system starts swapping and I
> >> am yet to find out why it does. Maybe it just cannot fulfill
> >> requests for larger chunks of memory but does not "tell" an
> >> application about it and just commits itself to swapping? Makes no
> >> sense to me reading output of top(1) or vmstat(8) displaying that
> >> the system has swapped out more than half a GB to disk when nearly
> >> half of the RAM available to the system (8GB) is not even wired
> >> up. The system reports nearly 4GB of physical RAM available for
> >> allocation together with more than half of a GB swapped out to
> >> disk. Makes no sense.
> >
> > Please read again. You are out of memory below 4GB (dma reachable
> > physical memory). The pagedaemon does a very poor job in that case
> > and this is what you see. It is a known issue and a fix will
> > eventually emerge.
> >
> > If the problem was trivial it would have been fixed already.
>
> I am not around here for working on things a chimpanzee could be
> trained to do.
>
You are overstepping and have been for a while. If you want any help,
better watch your tone.
