1 |
Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 6:16 PM Alan Grimes <alonzotg@×××××××.net> wrote: |
3 |
>> Programmers these days don't seem to have any concept that memory is |
4 |
>> finite and that it's usage should be optimized. =| |
5 |
>> |
6 |
> I have it on good authority that unused memory is wasted memory. It |
7 |
> is a good thing that I never run more than one process a time so that |
8 |
> my browser is correct in assuming that the OS wouldn't possibly be |
9 |
> able to find a better use for the RAM than that tab I haven't clicked |
10 |
> on in 20 minutes that is running some javascript with more lines of |
11 |
> code than the sorts of operating systems people actually used back |
12 |
> when they didn't run more than one process at a time... |
13 |
> |
14 |
|
15 |
This is true. I tend to have a lot of tabs open at times when I'm |
16 |
trying to find something. Or, trying to see if I can find something |
17 |
better. Thing is, as with most of us I guess, we only SEE one tab at a |
18 |
time. While Firefox did seem a little faster to respond, it sure did |
19 |
hog up some memory. I'd rather have it less memory hungry right now. |
20 |
|
21 |
To add to the original post. I have been using another file manager, |
22 |
PCMan, since yesterday. It doesn't have that nifty little video viewer |
23 |
on the right side but so far, memory usage has been normal. The command |
24 |
X in top shows the previous normal usage of a few hundred MBs of |
25 |
memory. It was a few to several GBs and increasing when having the out |
26 |
of memory problem. With what may be a process of elimination, it seems |
27 |
Dolphin may be the issue. I'm sure Firefox hogging up more than its |
28 |
share didn't help any tho. ;-) |
29 |
|
30 |
If anyone sees something that points to something else, please post. |
31 |
May just have to wait on a new update to Dolphin. I think they do that |
32 |
about once a month or so. |
33 |
|
34 |
Dale |
35 |
|
36 |
:-) :-) |