Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Plasmashell consuming huge amounts of memory.
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 03:08:49
Message-Id: 70dd633d-5c42-388c-398f-cdced0aff89b@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Plasmashell consuming huge amounts of memory. by Dale
1 Dale wrote:
2 > P Levine wrote:
3 >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com
4 >> <mailto:rdalek1967@×××××.com>>wrote:
5 >>
6 >> After another round of google searches, startpage
7 >> actually, I found where someone posted that having a slideshow causes
8 >> this.  I switched from slideshow to something else and sure
9 >> enough, it
10 >> hasn't hogged up memory, yet anyway. 
11 >>
12 >> So, disable slideshow until this gets fixed and at least you
13 >> don't have
14 >> to worry about it hogging up every last bit of memory. 
15 >>
16 >>  
17 >> ​I vaguely
18 >>  
19 >> ​remember reading that the problem might be related to plasmashell
20 >> ​loading all available slideshow wallpapers into memory.   If you
21 >> really want slideshow, maybe as a  possible workaround you can see if
22 >> limiting the number of wallpapers used with slideshow reduces memory
23 >> consumption.
24 >>
25 >
26 > That would be possible I guess.  Thing is, I have a lot of wallpapers,
27 > some hi-res large ones that came from NASA at that.  If it tried to
28 > load them all, I'd had to have a lot more memory.  I think I have over
29 > 20GBs worth of them.  Currently I have 16GBs of memory.  I'm going to
30 > upgrade one of these days tho.  My mobo can handle 32GBs but even
31 > then, I wouldn't want plasmashell to take up that much memory. 
32 >
33 > I can test this theory tho.  I can pick a small directory and let it
34 > cycle through them.  If it is loading them like you read, then it
35 > shouldn't use more than the space the wallpaper files take up.  If it
36 > is something else, then it should get real hoggy again.  Spellchecker
37 > doesn't like my new word hoggy.  lol 
38 >
39 > I'm going to test that and see what happens.  I'll post the results,
40 > just in case someone runs up on this thread, and on the bug report as
41 > well.
42 >
43 > Thanks for the info.
44 >
45 > Dale
46 >
47 > :-)  :-) 
48
49
50 Well, that didn't take long.  I found a directory that was about 1.6GBs
51 of wallpapers.  It should not use more than a little over 2GBs of memory
52 even if it loads all the files in memory.  Well, it took up right at
53 3GBs in a short period of time.  That would put it using well over what
54 it normally uses plus the directory.  Usually, it uses about 300MBs at
55 start up.  Add to that the 1.6GBs and you end up with about 2GBs or so. 
56 Since it was quickly approaching 3GBs, it was well past that. 
57
58 I'm not sure what it is doing but even if it is loading the wallpapers
59 up, it is doing something else in addition to that. 
60
61 I was hoping we were on to something.  Oh well.  It was worth a try.
62
63 Thanks.
64
65 Dale
66
67 :-)  :-)