Ruud@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy.World Announcements@lemmy.world · edit-21 year agoSome system load graphs of last 24hlemmy.worldimagemessage-square197fedilinkarrow-up11.73Kfile-text
arrow-up11.73KimageSome system load graphs of last 24hlemmy.worldRuud@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy.World Announcements@lemmy.world · edit-21 year agomessage-square197fedilinkfile-text
minus-squarePerhyte@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agoIt probably just didn’t mark that memory as “used” in the task manager.
minus-squareCashewNut 🏴@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-21 year agoI discovered this about 20yrs ago and there’s been a lot of drugs & drink since then. I do distinctly remember I could open my shit-hot 256Mb RAM desktop with Windows XP taskmanager and it shows a whopping 128Mb free RAM. 😎 Then I’d boot into my ‘733T H4X0r’ Suse Linux 7.3 and top would show 5Mb free RAM. 😱 This caused much upset until I found out the two OS’s have (had?) fundamentally different memory utilisation philosophies. May not be the case anymore but it was late 90s/early 00s.
But Windows also does pre caching?
It probably just didn’t mark that memory as “used” in the task manager.
I discovered this about 20yrs ago and there’s been a lot of drugs & drink since then.
I do distinctly remember I could open my shit-hot 256Mb RAM desktop with Windows XP taskmanager and it shows a whopping 128Mb free RAM. 😎
Then I’d boot into my ‘733T H4X0r’ Suse Linux 7.3 and top would show 5Mb free RAM. 😱
This caused much upset until I found out the two OS’s have (had?) fundamentally different memory utilisation philosophies.
May not be the case anymore but it was late 90s/early 00s.