just implemented a new samba server and did a mass file copy. when I do a free it says that all 256 is being used. however, right now, there is _zero_ load on the server. Does samba just use this much memory?? are there other test that I can look into? other than that it seems to be working fine
> just implemented a new samba server and did a mass file copy. > when I do a free it says that all 256 is being used. > however, right now, there is _zero_ load on the server.I presume you mean "all 256MB of RAM that I have installed on the samba server" Take a look at this output from my server: total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 514100 507112 6988 0 71808 37024 In particular, "buffers" and "cached" which are included in "used" but are actually available memory. Linux uses as much memory as you have available in order to provide disc caching and file buffering. After a mass copy it wouldn't surprise me if you had very little listed in free: all that memory was used in speeding up your copy! It will be available as soon as something else needs it.
Check the "cached" amount. Or do a "ps aux" and check the percent of memory used by your samba PIDs. It's probably all cached. Or, you don't have enough swap perhaps? On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 09:44, Chris McKeever wrote:> just implemented a new samba server and did a mass file copy. > when I do a free it says that all 256 is being used. > however, right now, there is _zero_ load on the server. > > Does samba just use this much memory?? are there other test that I can > look > into? > > other than that it seems to be working fine > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba