Hi Travis, The memory used by Riak (beam.smp) is for more than key storage, of course.
You can assume that in your case RES will get to about the same amount after a reboot, given a similar workload in Riak. -- Luke Bakken Engineer lbak...@basho.com On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Travis Kirstine <tkirst...@firstbasesolutions.com> wrote: > Yes, the reason I'm concerned is that we projected much lower memory usage > based on the calculations. We originally provisioned 2x the required memory > and it appears that this will not be enough. > > Am I correct in that the top cmd's RES memory for the beam.smp command is the > memory being used by riak for "key storage", if the server was to be rebooted > the memory would eventually climb back to this level? > > Thanks for your help > > -----Original Message----- > From: Luke Bakken [mailto:lbak...@basho.com] > Sent: July-18-16 11:35 AM > To: Travis Kirstine <tkirst...@firstbasesolutions.com> > Cc: riak-users@lists.basho.com; ac...@jdbarnes.com > Subject: Re: riak bitcask calculation > > Hi Travis - > > The calculation provided for bitcask memory consumption is only a rough > guideline. Using more memory than the calculation suggests is normal and > expected with Riak. As you increase load on this cluster memory use may go up > further as the operating system manges disk operations and buffers. > > Is there a reason you're concerned about this usage? > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Travis Kirstine > <tkirst...@firstbasesolutions.com> wrote: >> Yes from the free command >> >> [root@riak1 ~]# free -g >> total used free shared buff/cache >> available >> Mem: 45 9 0 0 36 >> 35 >> Swap: 23 0 22 >> >> Or from top >> >> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND >> 24421 riak 20 0 16.391g 8.492g 41956 S 82.7 18.5 10542:10 beam.smp _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
