Hi Asatoran
Thanks a lot, very helpful answer.
You're not going to get significantly
less RAM usage with Fusion, if at all.
If you do not have to revise your numeric answer (see
below), then the opposite is true. 45MB << 244MB !!!
<div class="jive-quote">but on my MBP, Fusion is using about 45MB
of RAM above what the virtual machine uses.
Wow. Only 45MB. If that is the case, then
I will throw away Parallels tomorrow, and
get vmware fusion instead.
...
I very much like the smooth integration
of the parallels-Windows into OS X, but
(at least 822 MB) - 596MB >= 226 MB
overhead for running parallels is by far
too much - if there is an alternative.
HOWEVER, could you please check again
if there aren't any "hidden costs". E.g.:
ActivityMonitor , or
terminal ... top -o rsize , or
terminal ... ps -A
Because I remember from years ago that a vmware
host installation on Windows back then unfortunately
installed a couple of (always running) processes,
mainly for network support host<->guest.
I know that I went through the hassle of creating
a script to always switch them OFF by default,
and ON only when I needed vmware.
*--> If you sum those "hidden costs" of RAM usage onto your 45MB,*
*--> how much is the resulting total RAM overhead of vmware,*
*--> above your guest-machine RAM ?*
*I have just checked this for Parallels,*
*there is another 18MB to be added to the 226M:*
ps -A | grep Par .... results in
+
_/ParallelsDispatcherService start+
__/prlnaptd
+
__/prl_dispservice -e --logfile ...+
(what is the ps command to show the RAM usage of each process???)
and using "top -o rsize" they seem to use up
*0.8M + 3.7MB + 13MB = 17.5 MB*
*--> Parallels burns up 244 MB more RAM than the guest OS gets.*
--> Bad, very bad especially on a MacBookAir
--> that cannot be upgraded to 4000MB or 8000MB.
😟
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Volker
Is there a reason you HAVE to use an Air with virtualisation
Yes, the weight. Top priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks a lot for your help. Different approach:
Which of the standard circa 50 processes of OS X could I kill to save RAM?
There is probably a profound thread somewhere, perhaps even in this forum?
Thanks a lot!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S.:
or sell the MBA and get a MB or MBP (or ugh! a PC. NOOOOOO! 😉 )
No, I actually don't want a PC. I only very seldom need Windows-prgs now.
I have worked with M$ for decades, but I now admit that OS X has a lot
of advantages. The biggest disadvantage however are all these strange,
limiting restrictions that Apple puts on her hardware & her users.
So perhaps one even more interesting way out would be a ~1kg PC hardware
which
IS extendable to 4GB or more, and try to get OS X running on that???