Skip navigation

Attention Kappy: Could You Take a Look at This?

1616 Views 8 Replies Latest reply: Jul 31, 2011 12:29 PM by Kappy RSS
MacJoseph Level 3 Level 3 (595 points)
Currently Being Moderated
Jul 30, 2011 12:50 PM

Kappy,

 

 

Would you be so kind as to look at this thread concerning the amount of RAM being consumed by the kernel task. Seems as though the k_t is eating a lot of RAM. It hasn't affected system performance for me as I have 8GB of RAM. But others in that thread as baffled as to why k_t would consume so much. I wonder myself why so much, but as it hasn't affected performance I haven't said anything about it. Thanks Kap!

 

Regards,

 

Joseph

MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7), 2011 MBP 15" 2.0Ghz 8GB RAM
  • Kappy Level 10 Level 10 (221,095 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 30, 2011 1:02 PM (in response to MacJoseph)

    How much RAM the kernel_task requires is partly determined by the services being used on the machine and whether it's booting the 32-bit or 64-bit kernel, so this differs from user to user. I have 4 GBs of RAM in a 2010 iMac booting the 64-bit kernel. My kernel_task is about 344 MBs. I am running Safari, Mail, a newsreader, and a few menubar applications.

     

    And, without any information of what these users consider a large amount of RAM, it's pretty hard to comment. Most users have no clue about how memory is used in a Mac nor even why. Newer Macs boot the 64-bit kernel by default which can result in a kernel_task nearly double in size of a machine booting the 32-bit kernel.

     

    In looking over a few of the posts in that thread, I can only conclude that the participants are making a mountain out of a molehill because they have created a problem in their mind that doesn't really exisit.

     

    You can make your life a little easier by ignoring such discussions with the pseudo-techies.

  • rodknocker Level 1 Level 1 (5 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 30, 2011 2:05 PM (in response to Kappy)

    It is only the 2011 MBPs, of course. My other MBP 2008 late doesn't have this issue...

     

     

    And thanks, Kappy But i think i am not a pseudo-techie.

  • Kappy Level 10 Level 10 (221,095 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 30, 2011 4:51 PM (in response to MacJoseph)

    The only situations I'm familiar with where that may occur abnormally is if Lion was not installed on a clean drive but upgraded a Snow Leopard system. Reinstalling fixed it.

  • wyager Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 30, 2011 7:38 PM (in response to Kappy)

    Thanks for the help, Kappy. This problem is not exclusive to Lion. It happened in snow leopard as well. 600+ megs is not uncommon usage for me. And no, I am not a pseudo-techie

     

    Are you saying that a clean Lion install will fix this? Do you know what is causing the excessive RAM usage?

  • Kappy Level 10 Level 10 (221,095 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 31, 2011 12:29 PM (in response to wyager)

    No, I said that it may work in some cases. That assumes there actually is a problem with the prior upgrade.

Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Legend

  • This solved my question - 10 points
  • This helped me - 5 points
This site contains user submitted content, comments and opinions and is for informational purposes only. Apple disclaims any and all liability for the acts, omissions and conduct of any third parties in connection with or related to your use of the site. All postings and use of the content on this site are subject to the Apple Support Communities Terms of Use.