Skip navigation

Inactive memory is huge hit on performance

42101 Views 145 Replies Latest reply: Dec 30, 2013 8:57 AM by macintosh_fred RSS
  • BobHarris Level 6 Level 6 (12,520 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 5, 2012 6:11 AM (in response to softwater)

    BugReporter

    <http://bugreporter.apple.com>

    Free ADC (Apple Developer Connection) account needed for BugReporter.

    Anyone can get a free account at:

    <http://developer.apple.com/programs/register/>

     

    And/Or

     

  • LexSchellings Level 5 Level 5 (5,510 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 5, 2012 6:35 AM (in response to softwater)

    I am ignoring nothing Software: you are because you don't understand that in this case without more about the Joa glitches, you can not even be sure that it is the same situation as the others. Please stop quarrelling and accept my explanation of not using a bandage. I also know not what is going on (have suspicions), but I advise strongly against suppressing symptoms (in any field).

    Joa: plse give the screenshots and answer Linc's question.

    Lex

  • Linc Davis Level 10 Level 10 (108,120 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 5, 2012 2:25 PM (in response to Joasousa)

    You have far too many pageouts. Some process, or the kernel, has a memory leak. Click the heading of the "Real Mem" column in the process table to order the entries by memory usage. You may have to click it again to get the highest value at the top. Post a screenshot of the whole window.

  • Joel Bruner1 Level 1 Level 1 (30 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 5, 2012 2:42 PM (in response to Joasousa)

    Until they get it fixed in 10.7.3 (and I think they just might ) if you install XCode you will get a handy utility to purge inactive memory /usr/bin/purge

     

    I've put this on my 10.6 servers which have had the problem with not using Inactive memory and swapping out instead, I made a recurring launchd (Lingon) to run at 1:00 am - and it keeps the free memory free. I have no hope of 10.6 getting any bug fixes, but 10.7 is current and they should be able to fix this if we bug report them enough. Lion seems to be hard hit because Safari 5.1 introduces the memory sucking sandbox process which is quite greedy and then the OS itself seems not to be very generous in reallocating Inactive memory.

     

    I know there are skeptics and defenders of the "infallible" MacOS, but you need to stand down and stop opinionating on issues that aren't affecting you as if they couldn't possibly affect anyone else! For goodness sake: "reset PRAM, SMC, is the RAM to the exact spec"? If the RAM wasn't to spec the system probably wouldn't boot and if it did it might affect performance but not the ability to mark RAM as Inactive/Active/Free.

     

    So let me say, if this is affecting you then I believe you, download XCode and you get /usr/bin/purge which can be automated to run or run manually.

  • BobHarris Level 6 Level 6 (12,520 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 5, 2012 2:47 PM (in response to Joel Bruner1)
    but 10.7 is current and they should be able to fix this if we bug report them enough.

    As long as everyone keeps in mind that this forum is not a way to report anything and they use one of the following feedback paths, then you might get your wish:

     

    BugReporter

    <http://bugreporter.apple.com>

    Free ADC (Apple Developer Connection) account needed for BugReporter.

    Anyone can get a free account at:

    <http://developer.apple.com/programs/register/>

     

    And/Or

     

    Mac OS X Feedback

    <http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html>

  • LexSchellings Level 5 Level 5 (5,510 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 6, 2012 12:26 AM (in response to Joel Bruner1)

    Joel, please, if you read this thread, you already know that the problem is not with the amount of inactive memory at all, and that pruging inactive memory is just a counterproductive bandage. We have asked Joa already four times about the RealMem screenshot, and he does not give it.

  • softwater Level 5 Level 5 (5,370 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 6, 2012 2:24 AM (in response to LexSchellings)

    Oh Schellings, do stop bleeting like a stuck pig. First you start an argument with the OP,

     

     

    LexSchellings wrote:

     

    You are wrong.

     

    Then you start an argument with me,

     

    LexSchellings wrote:

     

    I disagree

     

     

     

    and then you have the temerity to accuse me of quarrelling. 

     

    Now you're attacking somebody else trying to help as well as taking a sideswipe at the OP. Get over yourself. If the OP doesn't want to take your suggestions, that's his business (and given your **** attitude I'm not ******* surprised). Deal with it or move along.

     

    ___________

     

    Meanwhile, there is an excellent discussion of memory usage here and some lucid explanations by R C-R. You should read the whole page from top to bottom because it is very educational. In some way it does support what others are saying, but it also points out that it is far more complicated than one may think, as the quote below highlights:

     

    R C-R wrote:

     

    A bit more on the difficulties of trying to use Activity Monitor as a diagnostic tool for memory use problems can be found here, specifically why it is not a good tool for finding memory leaks. It may also help clear up some of the confusion about real & private memory.

     

    It boils down to this: there are no shortcuts. If you don't understand the complexities of how memory management in OS X works -- & especially if you don't even understand what the per process numbers shown in Activity Monitor really represent or how they are computed -- then there is no way you can tell from these numbers alone if some process is using too much memory.

     

    Common sense alone should tell you that if that were possible then that's what programmers would do & there would be no need for the debugging tools Apple provides.

  • mulligans missus Level 2 Level 2 (370 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 6, 2012 3:06 AM (in response to softwater)

    softwater wrote:

     

    Oh Schellings, do stop bleeting like a stuck pig. First you start an argument with the OP,

     

     

    LexSchellings wrote:

     

    You are wrong.

     

    Then you start an argument with me,

     

    LexSchellings wrote:

     

    I disagree

     

     

     

    and then you have the temerity to accuse me of quarrelling. 

     

    Well you do become a pain in the *** after a while jumping in and confusing alsmost every post you see.

    And you expect the entire forum to let you be the only one here with an opinion or a solution. No wonder so many people are confused here.

     

    Over and out

  • woodmeister50 Level 4 Level 4 (3,690 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 6, 2012 3:35 AM (in response to Joasousa)

    Back to the issue:

     

     

    Joasousa wrote:

     

    Page outs: 3,31 GB

    Swap: 850 MB

    Wired: 2,72 GB

    Active: 3,52 GB

    Inactive 1,7 GB.

     

    Page in: 21,67 GB.

     

    PS: Right now performance isn't great but I'm not getting beach balls, CPU is Idle. I running Chrome, Safari and vmware fusion with a 2 GB virtual machine (and nothing else). 

     

    Using Parallels I don't have any issues at all.  Seems that

    Fusion may be where the issue is by using up memory

    and not releasing it properly to the system.

     

    I have 8gig RAM and have a 4 gig Win7 VM in Parallels

    and quite often will have Safari, Acrobat Reader, Open

    Office open and actively working back and forth between

    all and have no issues with beachballs or slow performance.

    On the VM side will have engineering apps running from

    various vendors: Cypress, Microchip, Xilinx, Matlab,

    Cadence to name a few.  Safari can get a little sluggish,

    it will do that sometimes even if it is the only app

    running after a fresh boot.  But that is just a Safari issue.

     

    This is a similar work environment on 2 machines:

    2011 Mac Mini quad core i7 Server

    2011 13" dual core i7 Macbook Pro

    both with 8 gig installed.

     

    Moved from Fusion some time ago because of

    system issues.  Parallels just seems to play a lot

    nicer with Macs than Fusion, at least with Windows

    VMs.

  • LexSchellings Level 5 Level 5 (5,510 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 6, 2012 4:10 AM (in response to woodmeister50)

    I agree, concerning Parallels, I even have 2 VM's running. Although I did never have problem like these with VMware, I prefer Paralles. It may be Fusion, but we will see more when Joa sends the screenshot  of the Real Mem column. Linc will easily solve the case, he is an expert in such cases.

  • mulligans missus Level 2 Level 2 (370 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 7, 2012 4:13 PM (in response to Joasousa)

    Joasousa wrote:

     

    The "infallible" MacOS is really starting to **** me off, Lion is a mess.

    revert to SL

     

    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3525616

     

    or Windows perhaps.

     

    Good Luck

1 2 3 4 ... 10 Previous Next

Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (4)

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.