[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Monotone-devel] Re: BSD Buildbots
From: |
Lapo Luchini |
Subject: |
[Monotone-devel] Re: BSD Buildbots |
Date: |
Mon, 04 Feb 2008 09:56:34 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071116) |
William Uther wrote:
> Firstly, I note that 10768*1024 = 11026432. That means that the maximum
> resident set size is greater than the softlimit you set, no?
Not necessarily, "softlimit -d" only limits the data segment, not the
code size.
> /usr/bin/time -l './unit_tester refiner:various_counts 2>/dev/null'
> without the softlimit?
That's exactly what I did, before the one with softlimit (with identical
results)... though I posted only the latter, as it was the "most strict"
of the two.
> Oh, and what does "ulimit -a" return?
I guess those are pretty standard "out of the box" FreeBSD values, as I
didn't change any of that.
freebsd6/i386 buildbot:
% ulimit -a
-t: cpu time (seconds) unlimited
-f: file size (blocks) unlimited
-d: data seg size (kbytes) 524288
-s: stack size (kbytes) 65536
-c: core file size (blocks) unlimited
-m: resident set size (kbytes) unlimited
-l: locked-in-memory size (kb) unlimited
-u: processes 3517
-n: file descriptors 7034
-N 9: socket buffer size (kb) unlimited
-v: virtual memory size (kb) unlimited
freebsd6/amd64 buildbot:
% ulimit -a
-t: cpu time (seconds) unlimited
-f: file size (blocks) unlimited
-d: data seg size (kbytes) 33554432
-s: stack size (kbytes) 524288
-c: core file size (blocks) unlimited
-m: resident set size (kbytes) unlimited
-l: locked-in-memory size (kb) unlimited
-u: processes 5547
-n: file descriptors 11095
-N 9: socket buffer size (kb) unlimited
-v: virtual memory size (kb) unlimited
> Secondly, I note that the number time returns is labelled "maximum
> resident set size". Is this including swap or not?
AFAIK not including swap ("resident" should mean "in real memory").
I will do more tests and let you know...
PS: I wonder if that testcase has something to do with this, or if it
would hit the next one if that one wasn't active... I'll try to check.