No, the point is that it's the same memory that would be cached anyway
if you were using non-mmap'd I/O.
This will be more obvious once you have say 10x more data (and SHR)
than you have ram (and RES).
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:27 AM, JKnight JKnight wrote:
> Thank for your response.
> Can we r
Thank for your response.
Can we reduce that value? Memory is used just 600M but the process occupy
3.2G. Too waste.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> That means that the mmaped files are indeed resident at the moment.
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:51 AM, JKnight JKnight
That means that the mmaped files are indeed resident at the moment.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:51 AM, JKnight JKnight wrote:
> Thank for your response.
> Do you talk about virtual memory (column VIRT show in top command)?
> But I mention about column RES. In my case, VIRT is 61.8G, RES is 3.2G and
Thank for your response.
Do you talk about virtual memory (column VIRT show in top command)?
But I mention about column RES. In my case, VIRT is 61.8G, RES is 3.2G and
SHR is 1.2G.
JMX show Memory Usage:
Used : 600MB, Commit 2.1G, Max: 2.1G
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/FAQ#mmap
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 11:54 PM, JKnight JKnight wrote:
> Dear all,
> I use JMX to monitor Cassandra server.
> Heap Memory Usage show:
> Used : 600MB, Commit 2.1G, Max: 2.1G
> But htop show Cassandra process consume 3.1G.
> Could you tell me why Cassandr
Dear all,
I use JMX to monitor Cassandra server.
Heap Memory Usage show:
Used : 600MB, Commit 2.1G, Max: 2.1G
But htop show Cassandra process consume 3.1G.
Could you tell me why Cassandra occupy memory very large than in used?
Thank a lot for support.
--
Best regards,
JKnight
