On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 05:39:44PM +0100, Jarry wrote:
> Hi,
> finally I managed memory limits to work using the old way
> using rss.hard and rss.soft (for whatever reason, cgroups
> simply did not work for me). But I'm a little surprised how
> memory is used/reported in this version (2.3.0.36.32):
from the version you list, I conclude that you are using
linux 2.6.35.2 - 2.6.35.7.
the Linux-VServer memory accounting was dropped in favor
of cgroups and 2.6.34.4-vs2.3.0.36.30.4 added a fake
entry to keep ancient tools happy (config option)
config VSERVER_LEGACY_MEM
bool "Legacy Memory Limits"
default n
help
This provides fake memory limits to keep
older tools happy in the face of memory
cgroups
> vs6a / # free
> total used free shared buffers cached
> Mem: 524288 160324 363964 0 0 158424
> -/+ buffers/cache: 1900 522388
> Swap: 524288 0 524288
> I'm running one more older vserver-host (2.2.0.7), and there
> I never get anything for "cached":
> vs6b / # free
> total used free shared buffers cached
> Mem: 262144 6556 255588 0 0 0
> -/+ buffers/cache: 6556 255588
> Swap: 786432 0 786432
> I also see RSS-memory usage as reported by vserver-stat is
> now much higher:
mostly because if you do not use cgroups, you get
no accurate memory accounting at all, and util-vserver
falls back to simply summing up the guest processes
> (new) vserver-stat:
> CTX PROC VSZ RSS userTIME sysTIME UPTIME NAME
> 6000 3 88.5M 155.9M 0m15s54 0m01s94 8m11s53 vs6a
> (old) vserver-stat:
> CTX PROC VSZ RSS userTIME sysTIME UPTIME NAME
> 6000 3 90.7M 4M 0m01s57 0m00s65 1d03h06 vs6b
> There is absolutely the same software running (namely nothing
> but init, cron and syslog-ng), yet the old vserver-guest takes
> just 4MB of RSS, the new one takes 156MB! This corresponds
> with ~150MB used for disk-cache.
> Unfortunatelly, I can't compare memory usage of vserver-hosts,
> as there is different software running. So my question is:
> Was something changed in caching, concerning vserver-guests
> recently? Was it "moved" from vserver-host to vserver-guests?
no, nothing changed in caching, but if you want guest
specific memory accounting, you absolutely need to
enable and configure cgroups ... I'd also advise to
update to a more recent kernel/patch ...
best,
Herbert
> Jarry
> --
> _______________________________________________________________
> This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists!
> Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.
Received on Mon Nov 28 18:13:35 2011