Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • September 04, 2015, 06:16:25 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Author Topic: A one-way memory usage?  (Read 2421 times)

fwoncn

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2009
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
A one-way memory usage?
« on: October 19, 2009, 10:14:30 AM »
Hi Farr users,
I'm using Farr now. Overall, I love this software except for its strange memory use. In my system, I've observed into its mem usage several times, and the result amazed me a lot. At first, the usage is around 4MB, then the first time I hit BREAK after launch, it increases to a little bit more than 8MB, and every time it does a more expensive job, the usage increases correspondingly. Now, the strange thing comes. Its usage never come down. Even when it's idle, the usage stays at the topmost level it ever reaches. It gives me a impression that Farr never realize memory :(
I'm curious about what about yours? do you have the same problem?

mouser

  • First Author
  • Administrator
  • Joined in 2005
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,013
    • View Profile
    • Mouser's Software Zone on DonationCoder.com
    • Donate to Member
Re: A one-way memory usage?
« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2009, 10:25:14 AM »
try the setting to minimize memory use:
http://www.donationc....msg117186#msg117186

fwoncn

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2009
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: A one-way memory usage?
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2009, 10:53:34 AM »
cool :)
this option should be tagged as recommended, i think
it behaves completely in accordance with my will now :Thmbsup:

f0dder

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,858
  • [Well, THAT escalated quickly!]
    • View Profile
    • f0dder's place
    • Donate to Member
Re: A one-way memory usage?
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2009, 11:03:21 AM »
this option should be tagged as recommended, i think
Why?

A lot of people are going to favor faster "wakeup" rather than saving a puny little amount of memory.
- carpe noctem

Lashiec

  • Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 2,374
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: A one-way memory usage?
« Reply #4 on: October 19, 2009, 11:21:16 AM »
If he's low on memory, not hitting the swap file is always nice :)

fwoncn

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2009
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: A one-way memory usage?
« Reply #5 on: October 19, 2009, 11:23:34 PM »
this option should be tagged as recommended, i think
Why?

A lot of people are going to favor faster "wakeup" rather than saving a puny little amount of memory.
That's just my personal opinion :) And I have never noticed there is any extra "wakeup" latency after I changed the option.

Anyway, I still think Farr acts abnormal in terms of the phenomenon I mentioned.