note to self....

http://blogs.earthside.org/note_to_self/

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

starwars screensaver

To the X screen saver with a binary entitled 'starwars':

Quit hogging all my CPU cycles - freaking NINETY-NINE PRECENT (99%) of available processor capability is occupied running the screensaver. This is a Bad Thing™.

Note to self: Delete/Remove this bitchy little bit of software ASAP

... and CHECK for other X screen hacks that have the same predatory tedencies.

Labels: , , , , , ,


Monday, April 24, 2006

memory issues

Why does kamix take more memory than Emacs?  I mean, for that matter, why does Emacs take more memory than Firefox?  Still, wtF?  Fully graphical web browser - Mozilla Firefox 1.5.0.2 is listed in top as taking 0.5% of memory (we're talking 512M here, I believe) - and that's running maximized and with the Performancing blogging extension open.

GNU Emacs, on the other hand - a text editor with a text inerface, but running under X (so I guess there are a few widgets allocated there) - Emacs is taking up (again: according to top) 3.7% of RAM, with no files open, and no child processes running (?). 

Now, this is nothing, really (3.7%) as we look up the list from bottom to top - in the same vicinity as Emacs on this listing (sorted by %MEM) we have such notable applications and services as kalarmd (3.8%), gkrellm (3.3%), and (less than 3%) xterm, artsd, etc.  No, this is nothing - we're in the lightweight end of the listing - let's look closer to the top.

Let's see ... kdeinit (4.1%), kdeinit (4.2%), kdeinit (4.5%) ... the list goes on - altogether there are something like 16 instances of kdeinit running, each of them taking up more RAM individually than either Emacs or Firefox - more, in fact than any other of the 15-odd applications running except for e.g. X (7.9%), kgpg (6.3%), kamix (5.4%) ... whoops - wait, I've overlooked something: firefox-bin is running up at the top, consuming some 12.7% - followed by the #1 instance of kdeinit (10.5%) second, and X itself (7.9%) third....

So please ignore what I said about Firefox at the beginning - that was 'firefox' the script that starts 'firefox-bin' - everything else was [i think] pretty accurate.

Labels: , ,


Archives

2004/09   2005/03   2005/04   2005/05   2005/06   2005/07   2005/08   2005/09   2005/10   2005/11   2006/01   2006/02   2006/04   2006/05   2006/06   2008/01  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]