On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 10:49 -0400, Joe Shaw wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 23:19 -0400, Carlos Moffat wrote:
> > Or not. It seems I spoke too soon. As far as I can tell, all my email
> > and most if not all my files are already indexed, but beagled is still
> > using 48% of my memory, acco
Hi,
On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 23:19 -0400, Carlos Moffat wrote:
> Or not. It seems I spoke too soon. As far as I can tell, all my email
> and most if not all my files are already indexed, but beagled is still
> using 48% of my memory, according to top. Numbers are similar as before,
> with RES for bea
> The only thing unusual is that I have BeagleExceptions file (attached)
> with some warnings I don't understand. Not sure if it's relevant.
The exceptions dont look good. I'll look into them later.
Thanks,
- dBera
--
-
Debajyoti Bera @ http://d
Part of this might be related to the issue we had with TermBuffers not
being thread safe. Could you update to 0.2.5 and see if there is any
change?
-Kevin Kubasik
On 4/23/06, Carlos Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:18 -0400, Carlos Moffat wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2006-04
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:18 -0400, Carlos Moffat wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:09 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > > > > 3612 cmoffat 15 0 77728 39m 8220 S 19.0 2.6 20:46.95
> > > > > beagled-helper
> > > By the way, could you send me your numbers for top? I'd like to have a
> > > reference.
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 19:09 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > > > 3612 cmoffat 15 0 77728 39m 8220 S 19.0 2.6 20:46.95
> > > > beagled-helper
> > By the way, could you send me your numbers for top? I'd like to have a
> > reference.
>
> I am away from my laptop. But my figures for helper and beagl
> > > 3612 cmoffat 15 0 77728 39m 8220 S 19.0 2.6 20:46.95
> > > beagled-helper
> By the way, could you send me your numbers for top? I'd like to have a
> reference.
I am away from my laptop. But my figures for helper and beagled are
similar which are about the same as your helper's (30-40
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 18:35 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > top - 18:16:27 up 5:32, 2 users, load average: 0.61, 0.94, 1.02
> > Tasks: 2 total, 0 running, 2 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> > Cpu(s): 59.0% us, 8.7% sy, 0.0% ni, 24.3% id, 7.7% wa, 0.3% hi,
> > 0.0% si
> > Mem: 1554852k to
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 18:35 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > top - 18:16:27 up 5:32, 2 users, load average: 0.61, 0.94, 1.02
> > Tasks: 2 total, 0 running, 2 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> > Cpu(s): 59.0% us, 8.7% sy, 0.0% ni, 24.3% id, 7.7% wa, 0.3% hi,
> > 0.0% si
> > Mem: 1554852k to
> top - 18:16:27 up 5:32, 2 users, load average: 0.61, 0.94, 1.02
> Tasks: 2 total, 0 running, 2 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> Cpu(s): 59.0% us, 8.7% sy, 0.0% ni, 24.3% id, 7.7% wa, 0.3% hi,
> 0.0% si
> Mem: 1554852k total, 1474592k used,80260k free,28104k buffers
> Sw
Hi,
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 17:33 -0400, D Bera wrote:
> > I'm using beagle 0.2.4 from Debian/Sid. Although the last version hasn't
> > reached Debian yet, I wanted to ask about memory usage. Right now,
> > beagled is using 55+ of all the memory (I have 1.5GB total). That seems
> > like a lot, and
> I'm using beagle 0.2.4 from Debian/Sid. Although the last version hasn't
> reached Debian yet, I wanted to ask about memory usage. Right now,
> beagled is using 55+ of all the memory (I have 1.5GB total). That seems
> like a lot, and as it's causing my computer to choke (specially with
> some CPU
Hi,
I'm using beagle 0.2.4 from Debian/Sid. Although the last version hasn't
reached Debian yet, I wanted to ask about memory usage. Right now,
beagled is using 55+ of all the memory (I have 1.5GB total). That seems
like a lot, and as it's causing my computer to choke (specially with
some CPU spik
2005/9/19, Joe Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The zombie processes are a bug in mono. If you upgrade to mono 1.1.8.3or 1.1.9 these should go away. (I also think we worked around a lot ofthem in 0.1.0 but I might be wrong about that.)
Ok, I hope this will be fixed in Ubuntu Breezy soon...
That won't
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 13:00 -0400, Joe Shaw wrote:
> Can you run beagled with the --debug-memory flag and then file a bug
> with the logs from ~/.beagle/Log attached? That might give us an idea
> of what is causing the memory usage to get out of hand.
Also, like D Bera suggested, can you nar
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 15:50 +0200, Nico Kaiser wrote:
> @devs:
> Could this be because of shutdown issues? Whenever I shutdown beagle
> (via beagle-shutdown) *or* whenever beagle tries to shutdown one of
> its helpers (when they consume too much memory), I get Zombie
> processes. Beagle stays
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 13:10 +0200, Gregor Hlawacek wrote:
> Found a second (third) issue with beagle 0.1 after running beagled for a
> while (2 hours or so) it uses 800M of memory?
>
> how come
Because there's a bug. :)
> here is the line copied from top:
>
> 16390 seppl 15 0 797m
Nico Kaiser wrote:
@devs:
Could this be because of shutdown issues? Whenever I shutdown beagle (via
beagle-shutdown) *or* whenever beagle tries to shutdown one of its helpers
(when they consume too much memory), I get Zombie processes. Beagle stays
intact, but the number of its zombie children
It might be useful to know if this is due to any specific backend (
the output of beagle-index-info while beagled is running reports
active backends).
> > Found a second (third) issue with beagle 0.1 after running beagled for a
> > while (2 hours or so) it uses 800M of memory?
> @devs:
> Could t
Hi!
2005/9/19, Gregor Hlawacek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Found a second (third) issue with beagle 0.1 after running beagled for awhile (2 hours or so) it uses 800M of memory?
@devs:
Could this be because of shutdown issues? Whenever I shutdown beagle
(via beagle-shutdown) *or* whenever beagle tries to
Hi!
Found a second (third) issue with beagle 0.1 after running beagled for a
while (2 hours or so) it uses 800M of memory?
how come
here is the line copied from top:
16390 seppl 15 0 797m 274m 3000 S 32.7 54.5 19:08.08
mono-beagled --debug /usr/lib/beagle/BeagleDaemon.exe --fg
--deny-b
21 matches
Mail list logo
