https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740631
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740631#c16
Scott Couston changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Total System Crash - |Error in the DYNAMIC
|Irrespective of Software |allocation of Physical RAM
|Version - Applications Fail |where Apps wont launch and
|to Launch - Windowing |SWAP is NOT utilised
|Manager Crashes - Signal |
|11 Fault |
--- Comment #16 from Scott Couston 2012-02-05 09:52:38 UTC ---
Greg, I thank you for the URL reference to how RAM is used in C #3, but this
itself begs the question of why does the web page need to exist at all if
everything about RAM was functioning perfectly and there are sufficient numbers
of users having problems in the fist instance for the web page to exist at all!
I have apps that wont launch when avail ram is at 84MG out of a total of 4GIG.
I have stored images showing that even when available RAM sinks as low as
84Meg, swap or virtual RAM is not utilised what-so-ever.
Then I have the problem that after three days of not touching the PC, the cache
RAM allocation remains constant 3 days after the removable media, that was
cached, was ejected.
When are cache buffers deemed to be dirty and then flushed - certainly in my
test case the files being cached were on a removable drive and the DVD was
ejected, but the cache buffers that no longer existed were not marked dirty
after three days.
Your web page happily says that if an application asks for RAM that was
previously dedicated to cache, that it would be dynamically given RAM - The
problem is the DYNAMIC allocation of RAM between cache and apps just is not
happening for so many users to complain or raise questions!
It also appears that DYNAMIC use of virtual or swap RAM does not occur.
It also appears that there is NO parameter that flags cache ram as being dirty
and following that there in no DYNAMIC flush of Dirt Cache buffers!
I am happy with your expertise that is greater than mine; but it begs the
question that if all is well, why was a web page created to explain to so many
users that their concerns were not valid.
There was a time I can recall that you could not ever see serious amounts of
RAM being Dynamic allocated to cache. It was horrible to see that despite huge
available amounts of RAM very little was devoted to cache...Now we seem to have
gone overboard in this direction with apparent dire consequences.
If nothing I am happy to leave as invalid as I was serious when I said your
knowledge exceeds mine, however my I suggest a unique hit counter on your web
explanation page as growing hit numbers cannot rationally be ignored..thanks
mate:-)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.