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.