On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 01:34:07AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:43, Jim Crumley wrote:
> >
> > So this is not just another case of looking at top and thinking that
> > X is too big. X, or some process that it is allocating memory
> > for, is holding too much memory and i
On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 01:34:07AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:43, Jim Crumley wrote:
> >
> > So this is not just another case of looking at top and thinking that
> > X is too big. X, or some process that it is allocating memory
> > for, is holding too much memory and i
On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 05:06, Jeremy Nickurak wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:34, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > You may be interested in this thread:
> >
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2003/debian-powerpc-200309/msg00109.html
>
> Unfortunately, clients leaking resources wouldn't explain w
On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 05:06, Jeremy Nickurak wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:34, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > You may be interested in this thread:
> >
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2003/debian-powerpc-200309/msg00109.html
>
> Unfortunately, clients leaking resources wouldn't explain w
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:34, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> You may be interested in this thread:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2003/debian-powerpc-200309/msg00109.html
Unfortunately, clients leaking resources wouldn't explain why the same
set of clients exhibits this problem under xfree86 4
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:34, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> You may be interested in this thread:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2003/debian-powerpc-200309/msg00109.html
Unfortunately, clients leaking resources wouldn't explain why the same
set of clients exhibits this problem under xfree86 4
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:43, Jim Crumley wrote:
>
> So this is not just another case of looking at top and thinking that
> X is too big. X, or some process that it is allocating memory
> for, is holding too much memory and it won't let it go.
You may be interested in this thread:
http://lists.d
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 17:43, Jim Crumley wrote:
>
> So this is not just another case of looking at top and thinking that
> X is too big. X, or some process that it is allocating memory
> for, is holding too much memory and it won't let it go.
You may be interested in this thread:
http://lists.d
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 03:05:10AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 10:56:27AM -0500, Jim Crumley wrote:
> > I have been experiencing I think is a nasty memory leak since I
> > upgrade to 4.3.0-0pre1v1 several weeks ago. I thought that it
> > might be kernel related probl
On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 03:05:10AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 10:56:27AM -0500, Jim Crumley wrote:
> > I have been experiencing I think is a nasty memory leak since I
> > upgrade to 4.3.0-0pre1v1 several weeks ago. I thought that it
> > might be kernel related probl
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 10:56:27AM -0500, Jim Crumley wrote:
> I have been experiencing I think is a nasty memory leak since I
> upgrade to 4.3.0-0pre1v1 several weeks ago. I thought that it
> might be kernel related problem because I was running a couple
> month old 2.5 kernel, but I have upgra
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 10:56:27AM -0500, Jim Crumley wrote:
> I have been experiencing I think is a nasty memory leak since I
> upgrade to 4.3.0-0pre1v1 several weeks ago. I thought that it
> might be kernel related problem because I was running a couple
> month old 2.5 kernel, but I have upgra
Hi,
I have been experiencing I think is a nasty memory leak since I
upgrade to 4.3.0-0pre1v1 several weeks ago. I thought that it
might be kernel related problem because I was running a couple
month old 2.5 kernel, but I have upgrade to 2.6.0 test4 and I
still have the problem.
I am running t
Hi,
I have been experiencing I think is a nasty memory leak since I
upgrade to 4.3.0-0pre1v1 several weeks ago. I thought that it
might be kernel related problem because I was running a couple
month old 2.5 kernel, but I have upgrade to 2.6.0 test4 and I
still have the problem.
I am running t
14 matches
Mail list logo
