Discussion, talk and tips
https://forum.puppylinux.com/
Fresh booting
After hours / days / weeks of working
Any idea how to flush or unload the 6.848GB from RAM (7.55GB - 702MB)
without saving or rebooting in PM13 (like "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind")?
Tried BleachBit to no avail.
In Windows 10, some simply do this:
@sonny
You could try this script and see if it helps you.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/twnzyg49 ... m.zip/file
Just extract the zipped file and then right click, run in terminal.
Jasper wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 8:46 am@sonny
You could try this script and see if it helps you.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/twnzyg49 ... m.zip/file
Just extract the zipped file and then right click, run in terminal.
I did but it was ineffective and insignificant.
Maybe CleanRAM by Argolance, viewtopic.php?p=25645&sid=c5bc3b898e3a2 ... d4c#p25645
But how are your running your Puppy? With 7.55 Gb in RAM, it appears that you are not using a SaveFile/Folder, nor any SFSes nor AppImages --each of which are mounted rather than loaded into RAM-- nor portables which are linked to your OS. All of the foregoing just create links to their file-systems, copying components into RAM as needed and unloaded when no longer in use.
My best guess is that you've stuffed everything into 'alphabet drives' --e.g., adrv.sfs, ydrv.sfs-- which are copied entirely into RAM on bootup; or have Remastered so that your puppy_version.sfs includes everything and are not using the 'nocopy' argument in your boot-stanza.
mikeslr wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 4:42 pmMaybe CleanRAM by Argolance, viewtopic.php?p=25645&sid=c5bc3b898e3a2 ... d4c#p25645
But how are your running your Puppy? With 7.55 Gb in RAM, it appears that you are not using a SaveFile/Folder, nor any SFSes nor AppImages --each of which are mounted rather than loaded into RAM-- nor portables which are linked to your OS. All of the foregoing just create links to their file-systems, copying components into RAM as needed and unloaded when no longer in use.
My best guess is that you've stuffed everything into 'alphabet drives' --e.g., adrv.sfs, ydrv.sfs-- which are copied entirely into RAM on bootup; or have Remastered so that your puppy_version.sfs includes everything and are not using the 'nocopy' argument in your boot-stanza.
Thank you, Sir Mike.
I did and it was insignificant.
No, I use 'nocopy' all the way since it's more relevant today (USB, SSD, & other flash media are running so much faster these days).
Note: This case is for the default stock Fossapup64 for 'non-nocopy' and PM13, not DARKPUPPY & DARKPUPPY BE ('nocopy' by default).
The fact that memory use grows with time to me points the finger at cache. Browsers are a big, but not the only offender here. Without knowing details on your install and browsers I can't point to specific locations but a file search for cache (and/or ".cache" should find the locations. Have a look at what is in them. Basically all cache contents can be safely deleted and it is pretty simple to write a script to do that and execute it manually or crond it. I have all my browsers set to clear cache on shutdown and that pretty much takes care of it for me.
It could be a memory leak but it's simple to check and deal with the cache bloat first.
Marv wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 5:07 pmThe fact that memory use grows with time to me points the finger at cache. Browsers are a big, but not the only offender here. Without knowing details on your install and browsers I can't point to specific locations but a file search for cache (and/or ".cache" should find the locations. Have a look at what is in them. Basically all cache contents can be safely deleted and it is pretty simple to write a script to do that and execute it manually or crond it. I have all my browsers set to clear cache on shutdown and that pretty much takes care of it for me.
It could be a memory leak but it's simple to check and deal with the cache bloat first.
Even with zero browsing, processes like copying and pasting (large) files, compiling, making pets and sfses, and stuff will quickly fill the RAM.
The graphic in your OP seems to be conky --guessing as I don't use it.
I wonder if there's a bug, or somehow the code it uses to calculate RAM usage has been broken?
What do Menu>System>Htop System Process Viewer, or Menu>System>Pupsys-Info, click Devices>Memory tell you?
mikeslr wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 10:21 pmThe graphic in your OP seems to be conky --guessing as I don't use it.
I wonder if there's a bug, or somehow the code it uses to calculate RAM usage has been broken?
What do Menu>System>Htop System Process Viewer, or Menu>System>Pupsys-Info, click Devices>Memory tell you?
Is this Conky's 'broken' RAM usage calculation that you mentioned?
sonny wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 6:05 pmEven with zero browsing, processes like copying and pasting (large) files, compiling, making pets and sfses, and stuff will quickly fill the RAM
Stuff are kept in RAM/cached for potential fast reuse/
re-access .
The system manages cache-swapping.
The system manages storage-IO.
Why do you want to clear the RAM/caches?
some1 wrote: Wed Jan 03, 2024 12:38 amsonny wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 6:05 pmEven with zero browsing, processes like copying and pasting (large) files, compiling, making pets and sfses, and stuff will quickly fill the RAM
Stuff are kept in RAM/cached for potential fast reuse/
re-access .
The system manages cache-swapping.
The system manages storage-IO.Why do you want to clear the RAM/caches?
@mikeslr :-
I understand your reasoning vis-a-vis that 7.5 GB in RAM, and I see where you're coming from.
However, I quite frequently have anywhere between 6-12 GB RAM in use during a session.....composed of perhaps 4-5 browsers all open at the same time, and maybe half-a-dozen or so other apps multi-tasking in the background. It's not hard to do, though with 32GB of the stuff, an almost 4GHz 9th-gen quad-core Pentium 'Gold' and over 5TB+ of fast drive storage, the system barely notices it.
I don't use "alphabet" drvs. Just a bog-standard save-folder.....
(shrug...)
Mike. 
Sonny, the difference between the amount of RAM used as reported by Pupsys-Info and Conky in the graphics of your last post could just be how those applications are doing the calculations; in particular, how it calculates the effect of cached files.
But I assume your screen-shots were taken after a reboot. If that's the case, the only way to tell if cache is being cleared is to run your computer 'normally' for a while, then use one of the cache cleaning techniques/applications and compare the results again, I know that on my systems CleanRAM does clear cache. But not entirely: remember on boot-up the compressed 'alphabet drives' and compressed Puppy's core SFS --unless the 'nocopy' option is used-- are copied into RAM cache. After running CleanRAM, its computations will still reflect their presence.
mikeslr wrote: Wed Jan 03, 2024 2:20 pmSonny, the difference between the amount of RAM used as reported by Pupsys-Info and Conky in the graphics of your last post could just be how those applications are doing the calculations; in particular, how it calculates the effect of cached files.
But I assume your screen-shots were taken after a reboot. If that's the case, the only way to tell if cache is being cleared is to run your computer 'normally' for a while, then use one of the cache cleaning techniques/applications and compare the results again, I know that on my systems CleanRAM does clear cache. But not entirely: remember on boot-up the compressed 'alphabet drives' and compressed Puppy's core SFS --unless the 'nocopy' option is used-- are copied into RAM cache. After running CleanRAM, its computations will still reflect their presence.
Sir Mike, thank you for your reply.
I guess 'nocopy' is more relevant today (RAM speed vs. SSD speed in real operation).
And last time I checked, a 20-year-old PC with HDD and a 10-year-old PC
with smaller SSD had comparable prices.