Mavericks RAM

My Mavericks installation is purring along with 4 of 8gb used with just chrome running

Kernel_task is running at ~580MB for me.

Did you upgrade your OS? Or is it a fresh new installation?

Mavericks does take a much more aggressive approach to using free or available RAM for file caches.

Also, is your spotlight index still updating?

I'm having the same problem. Only spotlight is done updating. I start the computer and I have 13GB free. I run parallels for windows 8 and google chrome, maybe iTunes. But with ML that still left me with about 7-10GB free. I'm down to about 6MB free. Unlike our friend here, my computer appears to be running correctly and with little to no lagging. I'm not sure why it does this, but I'd sure like to fix it. Either that or put an update out for Mac Minis.

The RAM use is NOT a bug - Mavericks has a heavily revised memory use model and uses much more available RAM for caches than previous OS X

Having free RAM constantly available and unused is a waste of a valuable resource - Mavericks has been explicitly designed to try and make much better use of those available memory resources to improve system performance and responsiveness.

Well I game too, and that extra RAM space helped with another bug that I had in this thing. Chill bud. So what you're telling me though is that its just going to use up all my RAM regardless?

gnodab wrote:

Well I game too, and that extra RAM space helped with another bug that I had in this thing. Chill bud. So what you're telling me though is that its just going to use up all my RAM regardless?

It's not just going to fill it up aimlessly. Based on what is running, what has recently been running, what files are open, what files have been recently opened, and a host of other variables, it is going to try to optimize the use of RAM for system, program, and file caches. It will constantly dynamically alter RAM use to avoid disc I/O as much as possible within the parameters of system load and use.

But generally, just having unused RAM sitting idle "just in case" is pointless and a waste of resources - if that RAM can be put to good use to improve system performance, it will be. As system load changes, RAM use will be dynamically reconfigured to optimally suit the new or changed situation.

"It's not just going to fill it up aimlessly. Based on what is running, what has recently been running, what files are open, what files have been recently opened, and a host of other variables, it is going to try to optimize the use of RAM for system, program, and file caches. It will constantly dynamically alter RAM use to avoid disc I/O as much as possible within the parameters of system load and use."

Ok see now that's my problem. It appears to be aimless. I've even left the computer alone running no programs, and its filled up the RAM down to 6 MB. Any suggestions?

Its not a just in case thing- it was seriously a bug fix.

You also said "my computer appears to be running correctly and with little to no lagging" so I honestly have no idea what you are trying to fix?

If you launch programs, do they load promptly and correctly? Once loaded, do they function as they should? Do you ever see actual page outs to VM?

If the system is running fine, then regardless of the numbers you see in terms of RAM useage, I see no problem to "fix"?

Its just unusual. I mean, wouldn't you want to know why it was doing that? It just doesn't make sense to me. If this OS is meant to be a RAM utilizing OS, then why on earth is it using it all up? But you have a point, if its running fine, then maybe I shouldn't worry about it. I don't think you'd have an answer anyway. Thank you though!

Would you buy a Bugatti Veyron (1000 HP) so that you can use 15% for your daily drive to work?

If the RAM is available, and faster to access than disk caches, why not put multuple "rapid access" elements into it?

But if you want to believe that 60% of the RAM kept free for later usage is a good thing, we will not convince you.

gnodab wrote:

Its just unusual. I mean, wouldn't you want to know why it was doing that?

Actually no - I would ignore it. As I say, unused RAM is in many ways a purely wasted resource. If the system has a use for it, I'm happy to see it use it.

My concern would only ever be raised if with my 8GB and knowing my normal uses of my machine, I noticed I was suddenly getting regular or large page outs. As long as everything is running fine and I am not actually using any virtual memory at all, I could not care less what the RAM useage stats are - I just let the system do its thing.

I'd never buy a Bugatti Veyron. But thank you for you answers, everyone. I'll just not worry about it. Now, let's answer the orignial poster's question.

I have also seen a jump in kernel_task to 1.37GB in Mavericks as

opposed to 650 to 680 MB in Mountain Lion. This is on a 2011 Mac

Mini Server with 16GB RAM installed. Not seeing any real issues

either but am quite curious as to why the kernel task has doubled in

size.

kernel_task also includes all the kernel extensions that have been loaded, and there will be new ones in Mavericks, or previous ones that take more space now depending on how their functions have changed.