• melroy@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    This is on my Framework Laptop:

    free -h
                   total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
    Mem:            58Gi       3,3Gi        47Gi        82Mi       8,6Gi        55Gi
    
    • melroy@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Here is my Proxmox server:

      free -h
                     total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
      Mem:           125Gi        66Gi        33Gi        24Mi        26Gi        58Gi
      Swap:          8,0Gi          0B       8,0Gi
      
      
    • Damage@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      The other day my laptop was sluggish as hell, checked top and turns out Discord and Orca Slicer were maxing out my cores

      • dai@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        Is Orca that resource intensive? I’m running it in a container with KasmVNC and have never really checked out the resource usage. Admittedly it’s on one of my local servers in another room. I guess it’s how large your projects are too.

        Edit: maybe it’s just my small projects

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 days ago

        Firefox unloads old tabs when restarting the browser, so most of those are more like temporary bookmarks.

        Don’t think I’ve ever seen someone open 300 tabs in one session or on Chromium…

  • henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 days ago

    I’ve seen builds of the Linux kernel that comfortably fits in my on-die CPU caches.

    So it would just be a picture of an empty sofa.

    • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      There are mid range CPUs with 128MB of L3 cache now. A Linux distro like Tiny Core could fit entirely in cache.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        Tiny Core Linux is a minimal Linux kernel based operating system focusing on providing a base system using BusyBox and FLTK. It was developed by Robert Shingledecker, who was previously the lead developer of Damn Small Linux.

        Ah, that explains a lot! Didn’t know about TCL.

  • kevincox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 days ago
    % free -h
                   total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
    Mem:           125Gi        15Gi        90Gi       523Mi        22Gi       110Gi
    Swap:           63Gi          0B        63Gi
    

    I’ll use it eventually. Just gotta let the disk cache warm up.

      • kevincox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        I have enough disk space.

        Plus my /tmp is a ramdisk and sometimes I compile large things in there (Firefox) so it is nice to let it be flushed out to disk if there are more important uses for that RAM than holding a file that most likely won’t be read again.

          • kevincox@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            Yes. As this is a workstation the memory use is highly variable, >95% of the time I would probably barely notice having 32GiB. But other times it is a huge performance win to have that capacity available. Sometimes I am compiling lots of stuff and 32 compilers running + ample disk cache is very important. Other times I am processing lots of data and other times I am running a few VMs.

            It is a bit of a luxury. I think if I was on a tighter budget I would have gone for 64GiB. However the price difference wasn’t that much and at least a handful of times I have been quite happy to have that capacity available. And worst case I just have everything sitting in disk cache after a warm up which is a small performance win on every small task.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    That’s how I got a free netbook. The netbook had 32GB flash with windows and office occupying 27+GB. Then windows wanted to do an update - with an 8+GB file. Spot the problem. And windows can get quite annoying with updates. As the netbook could not be expanded, and attempts to redirect the update to a USB stick did not work, a newer netbook was bought, and I got the old one. Linux plus libreoffice plus a bunch of extras happily sat in 4GB…

  • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Gives a lot of Space for running Virtual machines.

    Also browsers can chew that up fast if you have a lot of tabs, Firefox has managed to do it a few times. At least until I started limiting its RAM to 8GB (best decision ever)

    Limit Firefox to 8GB of RAM .desktop file
    [Desktop Entry]
    Version=1.0
    Name=Firefox RAM limit 8GB
    GenericName=Firefox Ram limit 8GB
    Comment=Limit RAM for Firefox to 8GB;
    Exec=systemd-run --user --scope -p MemoryLimit=8G firefox
    Icon=firefox
    Type=Application
    Terminal=false
    Categories=Utility;Development;
    StartupWMClass=Firefox
    

    (To use it with other apps like Chrome or Electron apps just replace the command at the end, and startup class with the ones from the program you’d like to run. Icon and Name changes are optional but might be desirable so you remember what app it is for).

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Alternatively you can open about:config and limit memory usage there. For example limit in-memory cache.

      EDIT: it seems firefox doesn’t allow to set RAM limits yet, only cache sizes

      • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Something I didn’t consider when answering earlier is that even if Firefox did have good RAM usage limiting built-in I probably still wouldn’t use it or recommend it, because one of Firefox’s biggest problems is that it leaks. And memory leaks will not be negated by Firefox’s built-in RAM limiter but they will be by systemd’s (or anything else you might be using instead) Firefox would still crash in the event of a leak but it’s still better than it taking gnome or other apps with it, or freezing your system entirely.

    • Mwa@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      Oh my god thanks but what if someone had a systemd free system

      • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        It might be harder for them but there are similar tools that they could use to limit it. One I’ve seen people use is firejail, a tool designed for sandboxing processes and applications.

        I’ve personally never tried it myself though so I can’t attest to how well it works, either for this purpose or sandboxing in general.

        • Mwa@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          Oh, I was talking about runit,sysvinit and openrc systems

    • QuazarOmega@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      Does it kill Firefox if it tries to go over the limit? I think I tried this once and if there is a memory leak it just closes itself (which is batter than hogging the whole system, bit still)

      • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        No, it just limits the amount of RAM that Firefox (or whatever other application you launch with these parameters) will see.

        A few Firefox tabs may crash occasionally as a side effect. And obviously if Firefox eats up all of the 8GB it’s allocated it may crash itself though usually it doesn’t and tabs will crash before the browser crashes.

  • waz@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 days ago

    Wondering how my 64gb will outlast every other part upgrade my gaming Linux box will get over the years

  • SaltyIceteaMaker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    i mean, some games (cough cough factorio cough cough) manage to use up about 25GB of ram on my system, so it’s nice to have a buffer. now, my 64GB may be considered a bit overkill but i call it future proofing

    • bababu@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      I upgraded to 64 GB a few months ago, also thinking it would be future proof for a while. However, I entirely exhuasted it two weeks ago 😑

  • JGrffn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    Can’t relate, just upgraded my laptop from 32GB to 64GB since VScode would keep closing due to OOM. What? Oh, no, it’s not vscode’s fault…I keep like 5 Firefox windows with 30+ tabs open, like a fucking maniac… Close them? What do you mean “close” them?

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        I had around 1500 open tabs in Firefox. It was fine. I figured enough was enough and closed them all. Now I close all tabs at the end of the day before shutting down.

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 days ago

            Wait, do people shut down their computers when they’re done using them?

            I know I did on the desktop PC we had at home when I was a kid… But now the desktop doubles as a homeserver (and does that more than it does gaming lately) and the laptop just goes to sleep rather than shutting it down.