[chromium-dev] Re: private VM field on the about:memory page
Hello, On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 22:48, Anand Mistryakmis...@gmail.com wrote: Also, in general, how useful is knowing VM size considering it's not necessarily corollated with actual memory usage? I chatted with a few people when doing doing my memory work. Based on this, I think we should look at two criteria for what to display on the Linux port: - what we can measure accurately - information that will be useful to the user I don't think there is any use in showing the user the VM size. If a dev needs it, he can use top(1). Also, by not trying to display the exact same columns as windows does, hopefully there will be fewer uninformed comparisons of the numbers between platforms. Cheers, Joel --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[chromium-dev] Re: private VM field on the about:memory page
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Anand Mistryakmis...@gmail.com wrote: I'm looking at the about:memory page and am wondering how useful is the private VM field? Would it be just as good to have a total VM instead? The reason I ask is because private VM doesn't map easily to Linux where private pages can be shared becuase of copy-on-write. Did you see the memory usage backgrounder? http://dev.chromium.org/memory-usage-backgrounder It's written to be Windows specific, but 80% of the things will apply to Linux. Brett --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[chromium-dev] Re: private VM field on the about:memory page
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Anand Mistry akmis...@gmail.com wrote: I'm looking at the about:memory page and am wondering how useful is the private VM field? Would it be just as good to have a total VM instead? The reason I ask is because private VM doesn't map easily to Linux where private pages can be shared becuase of copy-on-write. I don't think it matters much; the VM size is not critical. You could diverge on linux/windows on this field (but you'll have to get the help text mopped up to describe whatever is displayed) Also, in general, how useful is knowing VM size considering it's not necessarily corollated with actual memory usage? Hard to say! But it does seem like an analysis of memory without being able to see some amount of VM information is incomplete. Mike --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[chromium-dev] Re: private VM field on the about:memory page
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Anand Mistry akmis...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:42 PM, Joel Stanley j...@jms.id.au wrote: Hello, On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 22:48, Anand Mistryakmis...@gmail.com wrote: Also, in general, how useful is knowing VM size considering it's not necessarily corollated with actual memory usage? I chatted with a few people when doing doing my memory work. Based on this, I think we should look at two criteria for what to display on the Linux port: - what we can measure accurately - information that will be useful to the user I don't think there is any use in showing the user the VM size. If a dev needs it, he can use top(1). Well, out of the 5 stats on that page, 4 of them can be reported with a fair amount of accuracy (WS private, WS shared, WS total, VM mapped). The first three are pretty obvious and apply to just about any platform. VM mapped can be reported very accurately by parsing /proc/pid/smaps and might arguably be useful. Also, by not trying to display the exact same columns as windows does, hopefully there will be fewer uninformed comparisons of the numbers between platforms. Which bring about another question, how consistent should we be across platform? Do we really want to show different stats on different platforms? This page is for geeks and reviewers that like to look at memory. Cater to them. They're going to want to compare windows and linux. So we can either give them the tools and instructions on how to do it, or they'll do it themselves (and who knows what they'll compare with). Mike Cheers, Joel @Brett: I've read it now and the relevant parts only talk about working set, not VM. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[chromium-dev] Re: private VM field on the about:memory page
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:42 PM, Joel Stanley j...@jms.id.au wrote: Hello, On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 22:48, Anand Mistryakmis...@gmail.com wrote: Also, in general, how useful is knowing VM size considering it's not necessarily corollated with actual memory usage? I chatted with a few people when doing doing my memory work. Based on this, I think we should look at two criteria for what to display on the Linux port: - what we can measure accurately - information that will be useful to the user I don't think there is any use in showing the user the VM size. If a dev needs it, he can use top(1). Well, out of the 5 stats on that page, 4 of them can be reported with a fair amount of accuracy (WS private, WS shared, WS total, VM mapped). The first three are pretty obvious and apply to just about any platform. VM mapped can be reported very accurately by parsing /proc/pid/smaps and might arguably be useful. Also, by not trying to display the exact same columns as windows does, hopefully there will be fewer uninformed comparisons of the numbers between platforms. Which bring about another question, how consistent should we be across platform? Do we really want to show different stats on different platforms? Cheers, Joel @Brett: I've read it now and the relevant parts only talk about working set, not VM. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[chromium-dev] Re: private VM field on the about:memory page
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Anand Mistryakmis...@gmail.com wrote: Also, by not trying to display the exact same columns as windows does, hopefully there will be fewer uninformed comparisons of the numbers between platforms. Which bring about another question, how consistent should we be across platform? Do we really want to show different stats on different platforms? Yes. On X we need to report memory used on the X server as well. This is unscientific, but for my single-tab gmail on Chrome and FF, I get Chrome at 1378k and FF at 618k, and we'll use a lot more with more tabs. See man xrestop. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
