High usage of physical memory

hello,
i just bought my first mac few days ago, and i have a question about the physical memory usage,
my mac is macbook pro 13' with retina display and 8 GB, and i think that for some reason my memory usage is significantly high then it should.
when i'm just using safari, i have about 600 MB available (and sometimes even about 200 MB)
is it fine? what is the regular memory usage in the mac?

The new OSX's will use as much RAM as is available, if possible. No longer is the amount the metric, but 'Pressure'. If if is green, all is well.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201464
Ciao.

Similar Messages

Shared memory (System V-style) - High usage of phys memory and page outs

Hi!
I get a much higher usage of physical memory when I use shared memory than I would expect. Please, I would really need someone to confirm my conclusions, so that I can revise my ignorance in this subject.
In my experiments I create a shared memory segment of 200 MB and I have 7 processes attaching to it. I have a ws of 1 GB.
I expect to see what I see when I attach to the shared memory segment in terms of virtual size, i.e. SIZE in prstat. After attaching (mapping it) to the process all 7 processes are about ~203 MB each and this makes sense. RSS, in prstat, is about 3 MB for each process and this is ok to me too.
It is what I see when each of the 7 processes start to write a simple string like 'Hello!' in parallel to each page in their shared memory segment that I get surprised. I run out of memory on my ws after a while and the system starts to wildly page out physical memory to disk so that the next 'Hello!' can be written to the next page in the shared memory segment. It seems that each page written to in the shared memory chunk is mapped into each process private address space. This means that the shared memory is not physically shared, just virtually shared. Is this correct?
Can memory be physically shared, so that my 7 processes only use 200 MB? ISM? DISM?
I create a shared memory segment in a C-program with the following calls:
shmid = shmget(key, SHM_SIZE, 0644 | IPC_CREAT)
data = shmat(shmid, (void *)0, 0);Thanks in advance
/Sune

Your problem seemed reasonable. What were you doing wrong?
Darren

High usage in memory

Dear All,
I have a situation here that high usage of system memory, When i check in st22 i cud see only short dump relating to it.
I checked in st06, 80 % of my memory is being used, only 20 % left.
When i check the same in sm37 and there are only three jobs running which took only low memory.system is paging, How do i exactly find out which job is taking high consumption of my memory.
where can i check all these.
Rgds,
sinner

Hi,
When you activate an InfoCube, rebuild an aggregate, delete the data of an InfoCube or perform other operations, the SAP BW system creates fact tables. By default, data compression is not activated in these cases.However, usually the numeric values in a fact table are correlated or are located in a small segment of the value range. For this data, you can achieve good compression rates with less memory space requirements and a better utilization of the DB2 buffer pool and, therefore, less input and output.
Reduces application server access to Database. Ie.g. set the number range buffer for one dimension to 500, the system will keep 500 sequential numbers in memory SAP OSS note 130253: Notes on upload of transaction data into BW
After the load, reset the number ranges buffer to its original state: minimize unnecessary memory allocation.

SQL SERVER PHYSICAL MEMORY USAGE HIGH

HI Teams,
i am going threw one of my production high physical memory usage in SQL Server. It always
around 90%.When i reboot the server, it will initially good but end of the day it will around 95 to 98% physical memory usage.
please give the valid solutions..,
Regards,
DBA

This is an expected/normal behaviour in SQL Server box. Memory management is highly dynamic in SQL Server and will use the complete memory allocated to SQL Server. It is also important to set the MAX SERVER MEMORY for the SQL Server instance. You may not
need to worry about this unless you find any performance issues.
Please mark this reply as answer if it solved your issue or vote as helpful if it helped.
[Blog]

Is it normal when physical Memory running high all time ?

Dear Expert
We have server production running apex application.
Data & Fact
OS : windows server 2008 R2 standard (64 bit)
intel xeon
RAM : 4 GB
installed product:
DB : Oracle 11g R2
APEX : APEX 4.1
listener : OHS
on resource monitor
Used Physical Memory running high all time (80 %).
is it normal?
Regard
Lutfi Hedir

Lutfi.Hedir wrote:
Hi Earl thanks for respond
My curiosity is why used memory high all time for 24 hour not on peak hour only?, when i stop db console service it drop litle bit :D.
My suspicion is that Oracle is grabbing as much memory as it can on startup and it's simply holding on to it. Memory usage is generally not going to go down from some baseline once an application has been started. It's not like the CPU utilization, which can fluctuate quite a bit for any one application. Memory usage will likely increase if you run some memory intensive operations, but doubtful that you will ever see it go down much.
Earl

My Notebook's Physical Memory too High!!

Hello, After almost 6 months I noticed that my notebook's spped is getting too much slow so I decided to do Recovery in order to get back its orginal speed. When I was done wtih Recovery, I found that at the very start (After Welcome Screen) it gets too slow and It shocked me that I have just done Recovery and what has happened. On experiencing it, I opened a Task Manager and found that in Performance Section that my PHYSICAL MEMORY IS fluctuating between 80-85% and sometimes 90-93% which is a way too high. What do I need to do?

, Hello and thanks for posting back. The reson the memory shoots up when you install some programs is due to the fact that they run in the background and with the newer office programs and so on they are constantly checking for updates and are linked to the internet for licence reason. The only way to fix this is to add more memory or look into memory management in windows. About Memory Management Now one thing you may want to check is the system itself. Here is a link to the system BIOS diagnostics you can run to check the state of your hardware and memory. HP Notebook PCs - System Diagnostics (F2) HP PC Hardware Diagnostics Please let me know what you find out. Thanks again for the post and have a great day.

Physical Memory vs. Usage Memory Help

I finished a new build using an MSI K9a Platinum MB.
I have a dual channel kit of mushkin 4GB (2GB x 2) DDR2 memory. When I install both sticks the BIOS shows (under system information) 4096MB Physical Memory but Usage Memory is only at 2.5GB.
If I take a stick out I get Physical and Usage Memory at 2048MB.
When I first got the board the BIOS was version 1.4. Windows XP 64 would not install with both sticks installed. It would boot from CD and hang right after I installed my RAID drivers / before selecting a HD to install to (where it says 'Windows is now starting' after it loads the drivers). Going to 1 stick / 2 GB solved this and windows installed fine.
After installing windows, updated to service pack 2, and did all system updates/drivers I put in the other stick and Windows hung at the startup screen.
I updated the BIOS to 1.5 and now windows will boot with both sticks but it only sees 2.5 GB, not all 4 GB. CPU-Z shows that both sticks are installed and recognised correctly but I'm only able to get 2.5 GB in Windows XP 64.
The BIOS recognises 4 GB are installed but will only let me use 2.5 GB. Any clues as to why?
Thanks!

"After installing windows, updated to service pack 2, and did all system updates/drivers I put in the other stick and Windows hung at the startup screen.
I updated the BIOS to 1.5 and now windows will boot with both sticks but it only sees 2.5 GB, not all 4 GB. CPU-Z shows that both sticks are installed and recognised correctly but I'm only able to get 2.5 GB in Windows XP 64.
The BIOS recognises 4 GB are installed but will only let me use 2.5 GB. Any clues as to why?"
suggest you new fresh OS installation XP x64 with SP2 included. also check the boot.ini ensure /PAE switch is there(should be there by default) ensure the PAE is active:

How to make use of the spare physical memory under buffered I/O of Essbase

We encountered an issue of the physical memory allocation of the server running Essbase with buffered I/O mode. We have implemented some cache setting in Essbase but still found that the disk I/O is quite high. Also we observed that Windows 2003 server cannot make use of the spare physical memory available as the system cache for database files of Essbase.
As allocating more memory as Essbase cache might not help, we would like to know other than changing to direct I/O mode, any other options can improve the disk I/O performance?
Thanks!

Sandeep Reddy wrote:
Hi Hyperion_User,
1. Disk IO performance,It mighe depend on quite a few things , one of the aspects might be your storage system. It can depend on the disk configuration too ( i.e if your disk is SAN or NAS, then it depends on the configuration like Raid ..etc).
2. It depends on the HBA ( host bus adapter).
3. Let me try to explain with diagram.
http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/uploadfile/freebookarticles/apress/2008dec16010208am/DataStorageDesign/Images/159059214X-1404.1.gif
4. It might depend on the HBA and even on the switch speed.
5. Buffered IO is a very generic setting,which most of them use( that should not be an issue).
6. Even if you have 30 to 40 GB free memory, every application in essbase has a limitation to it maximum usage ( 2 GB on windows ). Refer to DBAG for more information on this .
Sandeep Reddy Enti
HCC
http://hyperionconsultancy.com/
Thanks for your detailed advice. I just wonder if more physical memory can help to improve the disk I/O being used for concurrent read/write access. We are using Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition and not sure whether some spare physical memory can be used for this purpose.
Thanks again!

High Resident and Virtual memory for DBWR

Hello All
on 64 bit RHEL5 with physical memory of 98gb.
I see in OEM db console for 11gR2 database that dbwr processes is consuming 21gb of Resident and Virtual memory.
There are 3 dbwr processes (all using 21g) running and i see swapping happens even there is not much load on database .
Is it normal for dbwr to allocate such high memory ?
other memory config
sga_max_size big integer 60G
sga_target big integer 39808M
pga_aggregate_target big integer 10G

That is an excellent document.
The one thing you have to remember when looking at memory usage of Oracle processes, is they all attach to the same set of shared memory so your values will look high. For example if you assume your sid is XE and run the following command you can get something like this.
ps -eo pid,pmem,pcpu,rss,vsz,args | grep -i XE
29259 0.3 0.0 15004 869972 xe_j000_XE
29305 0.0 0.0 792 6560 grep -i XE
30927 0.2 0.0 10500 870080 xe_pmon_XE
30929 0.2 0.0 8520 869464 xe_psp0_XE
30931 1.4 0.0 58692 869464 xe_mman_XE
30933 5.9 0.0 241388 894124 xe_dbw0_XE
30935 0.3 0.0 14188 885016 xe_lgwr_XE
30937 0.5 0.0 21372 869984 xe_ckpt_XE
30939 2.8 0.0 114928 871024 xe_smon_XE
30941 0.3 0.0 14420 869464 xe_reco_XE
30943 1.3 0.0 55860 871060 xe_cjq0_XE
30945 1.3 0.0 56168 872216 xe_mmon_XE
30947 0.3 0.0 12360 869464 xe_mmnl_XE
30949 0.6 0.0 28260 870348 xe_d000_XE
30951 6.2 0.0 253720 875060 xe_s000_XE
30953 5.6 0.0 227984 875020 xe_s001_XE
30955 5.8 0.0 239556 875068 xe_s002_XE
30957 5.0 0.0 204960 875056 xe_s003_XE
30959 4.2 0.0 174516 875080 xe_s004_XE
30961 5.7 0.0 232812 875028 xe_s005_XE
30963 4.4 0.0 179788 875004 xe_s006_XE
30965 3.2 0.0 132100 874988 xe_s007_XE
30967 2.5 0.0 101676 874980 xe_s008_XE
30969 2.0 0.0 82304 874976 xe_s009_XE
30973 0.4 0.0 19980 885016 xe_arc0_XE
30975 0.4 0.0 19936 885016 xe_arc1_XE
30979 0.2 0.0 9672 869464 xe_qmnc_XE
30985 0.2 0.0 10932 869460 xe_q000_XE
30987 0.2 0.0 9004 869460 xe_q001_XE
Notice how my virtual size is all close to 875Mb for each process more than available with ram and swap space. That is because they all attach to my SGA thus the OS reports the SGA in it's memory listing.
Edited by: user652447 on Apr 11, 2011 9:56 AM

Why does my mac use virtual memory when I still have free physical memory?

I have a 2011 i7 quad core mac, I was hoping it would scream. Most of the time it does. However when trying to edit within FCPX I get a very disappointing experience with many pauses and pin wheels if I don't close every single other program.
I have 8GB of physical memory and when i'm experiencing these problems I see that i still have 1-2 gb of physical memory free or inactive. At the same time FCPX is only using 2gb of memory. I just happened to keep an eye on the VM page in/outs and noticed them going up.
Right now i'm doing some browsing and emailing, that's about it.. its sat with over 4gb of memory free or inactive and yet still the page in/outs is still going up occasionally. It's currently at over 2 million page ins, and over 1 million page outs.
So with so much physical memory free why is this happening!? At the moment the mac feels nice and responsive, but if i start trying to use FCPX i'll start to experience these slowdowns, stalls... whenever i see these i see my main hdd is being accessed whilst the pinwheel is displayed.. I mean i get it, its VM, the hdd is too full, a bit fragmented perhaps, its stalling... but i've got gigs of memory sitting free or inactive... why wont the OS use it!!!
Would my experience improve if i took the plunge and got 16gb of memory instead of 8gb!?
Thanks for your help!

Because without virtual memory, managing computer RAM is a royal pain in the ...
Virtual memory cost you nothing, and gains you huge benefits, even if you do not notice it
What cost you is when you need more real RAM than is available, and things are thown out of RAM, either back to the original file it came from (Read Only information), or pushed out to the swapfiles (/var/vm/*). Then the system has to wait for slower disk access. But even this is better than not being able to run the apps until you quit something else.
(speaking as someone that starting his professional life working with 1" punch paper tape, 80 columns cards, 7-track and 9-track mag tapes, 1MB disks (you heard me right 1 Megabyte), etc..., and trust me when I tell you that virtual memory is a god send to software development).
There are a lot of problems running a modern operating system with out virtual memory. For example all the shared libraries and frameworks that provide services to an application would all need to be compiled into the application, which means every application gets bigger and instead of having a single copy of the shared library or framework, you would have dozens of copies wasting your RAM.
Without virtual memory, you would be required to find a contiguous chunk of RAM to run your application. Think of this like going out to dinner by yourself, you can find any available table, but if you go to dinner with your extended family, you need a table for 10 to 15, and if you are going to dinner with your high school graduation class, you will need hundreds of seats all next to each other and a very large table. In the later situations you have to wait until the resturante has enough contiguous space, which means you have to wait until other diners finish. There may be lots of empty tables, but they are not together, and your group wants/needs to sit together. Virtual memory allows gathering any 4K chunk of RAM, building a virtual memory map for all those random 4K chunks, and make it look like one big contiguous chunk of RAM, so you can run your application right away, no waiting.
Going back to shared libraries and frameworks. This code will need to have addresses resolved so they branch to the correct locations during execution, and it will need to have addresses resolved on where its program variables are located in RAM. Using virtual memory, you can local a shared object into RAM, then place it in everyone's virtual memory map at the exact same RAM address. This means everyone can use the exact same code, and since everyone is using it at the same RAM address, it makes life so much easier for the operating system (translation, less work, less wasted CPU time, faster execution).
When a program wants to grow, for example a web browser loading a web page (and its images) into RAM, it needs to allocate additional RAM. In the contiguous RAM model, you need to get control of the RAM that imediately following your program, but if that RAM is being used by someone else, you have to wait until that program goes away.
Virtual memory provides protection from another program looking at and modifying your program's RAM. Malware would just love for virtual memory to go away.
You want virtual memory. What you do not want is excessive paging activity.
If you are concerned, then you can launch Applicaitons -> Utilities -> Terminal. Once you have a terminal command prompt, enter the following command:
sar -g 60 100
which will tell you the number of 4k pages written to /var/vm/pagefile ever minute for 100 minutes (modify the numbers to suit your tastes). You can then go about your normal usage, and come back later to see how much you have been using the pagefiles. If you have mostly zeros, and an occasional small burst, this is noise, and not worth worrying about. If you have sustained pageout activity, with higher numbers, then you should either consider running less things all at the same time, or looking for an application that is being greedy with its memory use (or has a memory leak), OR get more RAM for your Mac if you need to do all those things at once.
But do not complain about virtual memory. Life would be much worse without it. Then again if you have a better idea, write a research paper, and get operating system vendors (as well as hardware vendors) to implement your ideas. I am serious, as I've seen many accepted computing ideas be overturned by good new ideas.

Firefox 3.6.8 causes high cpu on idle (memory fine)

For the past week or two (I think maybe since I upgraded to 3.6.8) Firefox has started to take up high amounts of cpu when left to idle, (30% minimum on an E7200 processor, increasing to 50+% when I try and actually use it) which in turn has rendered it pretty unpleasant to use until I restart the program. The odd thing about this is that there is not a corresponding increase in memory usage, with the memory hovering around the 300k mark. I have tried disabling my add ons one by one, but the problem manifests regardless.

Solved my problem. I had installed a Persona (skin) that used animations. This seems to have been the problem.
What I did not appreciate is that when I disabled the Personas add-on, it did nothing to stop the behavior, and left the Persona intact.
After switching to another non-animated Persona, my cpu is back to 0%
I discovered this after lengthy experimentation with the above suggestions, which did nothing for me.

Physical memory cache behavior in Windows Server 2008 Enterprise

I have a question regarding how windows manages the cache portion of phyiscal memory. I have 2 servers which are identical OS configurations, hardware and experience nearly identical workloads. Server 1 appears to use its cache a lot. I often
see physical cache at at 75% of total memory (total is 16gb for both servers). I also see that the cache stays this high
even when overall memory utilization is minimal (say approx. 3-4gb out of 16gb for long durations). I suppose this means windows memory manager is keeping pages in the cache because it anticipates it may need them again, but would overwrite them with
new data if new processes needed it (I think of this cached memory when the system is near idle as "available" but correct me if I am wrong?)
Server 2 (again same workload and identical hardware, OS, configuration) doesn't appear to use cache as much. In fact, cache is always low round the clock (2 gbs usually) even when there is little to no memory utilization from processes outside the OS. Basically,
it is low when the server is near idle, while the server 2 keeps it very high during the same period of minimal workload. Why the difference? Does this behavior sound normal? Please advise. I am not a Windows Admin btw. I have a rudimentary understanding
of memory.. or so I believe at least : )
Thanks.

Hi,
Although both server are identical OS configurations, hardware and experience nearly identical workloads, there are still differences between them. We can use task manager on both server and Check which processes are using physical memory, please go through
the below article to check more details about windows performance issue:
Troubleshooting Windows Performance Issues: Lots of RAM but no Available Memory
http://blogs.technet.com/b/mspfe/archive/2012/12/06/lots-of-ram-but-no-available-memory.aspx
Regards,
Yan Li
TechNet Subscriber Support
If you are
TechNet Subscription
user and have any feedback on our support quality, please send your feedback
here.
Regards, Yan Li

How to prevent physical memory filling up and crashing Firefox (22.0) when watching Flash-based videos?

This happens maybe 30-50% of the time when I watch a video online, whether it be on YouTube or other streaming site. This usually happens when the video is at least 20 minutes long, and about 8-9 minutes in.
Looking at the Task Manager, my memory fills up to nearly its max (3.8-3.9 GB out of 4 GB) for a while before Firefox crashes. How can a video that is not very high definition take up that much physical memory space? After Firefox crashes, the RAM used immediately drops back below 1 GB.
Is this a Flash bug or a Firefox bug/leak? Or maybe my browser customization is at fault? It does not happen on Chrome.

Well, doomsdaze's rant didn't help solve my problem, but it actually makes me feel better about switching to Chrome.
Yes, I switched browsers, set up all-new extensions and settings, and accepted other inconveniences because I couldn't watch videos in peace on Firefox.
I had no idea there were so many others with this problem!

Physical Memory: 97%

I have a SQL Server 2008 R2 on Windows Server 2008 R2, on 64-bit virtual machine, dual processors dual quad core , and 32 GB RAM.
If I restart the server, and after all the processes and services start running, the used memory is not more than 4 ~ 6 GB (I don't remember exactly, but small compared to the overall 32 GB). Every day the used memory increases for 2~3 GB!, till it reaches
97% of the physical memory (31 GB), 29 GB of them for the SQL Server:
My question is how can I know what SQL Server processes or queries causes those increases in the memory? and if it is a process or query, why the used memory is not released after that process or query finishes ?!
Honestly, there is no complain about the performance of the server, but the weird thing is that as much as I give the server RAM as much as the SQL Server takes! The server was 8 GB and I increased it to 16 then 32 GB, but the SQL Server keeps eating more
and more!

Hi,
>>If I restart the server, and after all the processes and services start running, the used memory is not more than 4 ~ 6 GB (I don't remember exactly, but small compared to the overall 32 GB). Every day the used memory increases for 2~3 GB!,
till it reaches 97%
This is the way SQL Server memory works.When you restarted it its usage was low slowly you started running complex queries on SQL server which required pages from disk now SQL server started bringing these pages from disk into memory to make sure your query
is satisfied .Now when second time you use same query it will be fast as comapared to previous attempt as now there is no use of bringing pages in memory .Now if SQL would have released memory back your time taken would have been same and you would complain
about query being slow.This is the reaosn SQL caches as much data page it can so as to satify query from meory not picking pages from disk which is costly.But if Os faces presasure and SQLOS asks SQL server to trim its memory consuption it will do it politely.So
please dont be alarmed with SQL server using memory.
PLease dont look at task manager for SQL server memory consumption it might not show you correct memory utilization .I always recommend below DMV
select
(physical_memory_in_use_kb/1024)Memory_usedby_Sqlserver_MB,
(locked_page_allocations_kb/1024 )Locked_pages_used_Sqlserver_MB,
(total_virtual_address_space_kb/1024 )Total_VAS_in_MB,
process_physical_memory_low,
process_virtual_memory_low
from sys. dm_os_process_memory
If you do not want SQL server to use much memory you can change it from sp_configure by setting lower value for max server memory.But I am in favour you shoudl not do that .Set an optimum value for max server memory leaving 7-8 G for OS and other processes
running.
>>My question is how can I know what SQL Server processes or queries causes those increases in the memory?
I have never tried that and its little difficult to find what process unless that process is runnin.There is DMV sys.dm_os_buffer_descriptor which will tell you which database is using how much memory.Below query will resturn count of page loaded by each
database
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms173442.aspx
SELECT COUNT(*)AS cached_pages_count
,CASE database_id
WHEN 32767 THEN 'ResourceDb'
ELSE db_name(database_id)
END AS database_name
FROM sys.dm_os_buffer_descriptors
GROUP BY db_name(database_id) ,database_id
ORDER BY cached_pages_count DESC;
For further reading about memory to know that its really a normal behavior please see
Basics of memory
Please mark this reply as the answer or vote as helpful, as appropriate, to make it useful for other readers

Suse 10: Unable to release physical memory: Bad file descriptor

When I'm trying to run jrockit it prints the message "Unable to release
physical memory: Bad file descriptor":
stef@linux:~> export JAVA_HOME=/home/stef/progs/jrockit-jdk1.5.0_03
stef@linux:~> export PATH=/home/stef/progs/jrockit-jdk1.5.0_03/bin:$PATH
stef@linux:~> java -version
Unable to release physical memory: Bad file descriptor
[~38 time the same message]
Unable to release physical memory: Bad file descriptor
java version "1.5.0_03"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0_03-b07)
BEA JRockit(R) (build dra-45238-20050523-2008-linux-ia32, R25.2.0-28)
The vm does work and the speed seems to be okay but this messages pops
up every time I try to run an application. (It's not specific to this
user it also happens for root)
What does it mean and what can I do about it?
Yours,
Stefan

You can safely ignore the messages. It is a result of changes in the implementation of madvise in the 2.6.13 kernel (which, needless to say, isn't supported with JRockit). We'll change our usage in a future release so that these messages don't show up.
Thanks for pointing it out,
/Staffan

High usage of physical memory

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for