FreeBSD ate my RAM
80 points by theanonymousone 6 hours ago | 32 comments

tiffanyh 3 hours ago
If you like this kind of post, you might like this “htop explained” post.

https://peteris.rocks/blog/htop/

reply
NooneAtAll3 2 hours ago
htop explained*

I was looking forward for web protocol, but alas...

reply
tiffanyh 2 hours ago
It was a typo. Thanks, fixed.

But there is an http headers article you might like.

https://peteris.rocks/blog/exotic-http-headers/

reply
drdexebtjl 2 hours ago
I don’t understand the part about using heuristics and deciding what counts as used memory…

Used memory for the system is always total minus available.

Heuristics? I would hope that the system knows precisely what is using every single byte of physical and virtual memory. Is this a reporting problem? Why do we have to settle for heuristics and not the exact number?

reply
toast0 58 minutes ago
> I would hope that the system knows precisely what is using every single byte of physical and virtual memory.

Of course the system knows what is using every page. The difficulty is really in how to account for pages that are backed by disk.

If you count all of those as free, that's not accurate. If you count all of those as used, that's not accurate either. Additionally, FreeBSD (at least) doesn't have separate queues for disk backed pages, so there's not really a good way to know how much of your active (or inactive) memory is disk backed.

As an additional caveat that measuring active/inactive has costs. In the past, FreeBSD wouldn't really do the work for that until it needed to... I know some stuff changed, but I don't remember where it ended up; it wasn't great when it bulk marked a ton of pages as inactive and then the active ones would fault back in.

reply
drdexebtjl 29 minutes ago
> If you count all of those as free, that’s not accurate.

Why not? It depends on what you’re measuring. Physical memory? They count as free. Virtual memory? They count as used.

The ambiguities only arise when we stop making that distinction very clear.

reply
CrociDB 2 hours ago
The thing is it's easy to define free, unused memory. But a lot of the used memory is your system caching stuff that would be free if you needed more than what's actually free. So you can see you have 1g of free memory out of your 4g, but then you allocate 3g and it will do without a sweat and you'd be confused. So you have to go and dig for what those caches are and report that they're effectively free too.
reply
drdexebtjl 40 minutes ago
Instantly reclaimable disk caches should count as available, and they do.

This isn’t hard. The OS should just expose a counter for available memory instead of having applications understand every type of memory reservation.

edit:

Linux does this, but it has its own share of issues with memory counters. The “cached” memory includes tmpfs and ramfs for seemingly no reason.

reply
man8alexd 2 hours ago
You will be surprised by how inaccurate memory measurements are.
reply
duendefm 4 hours ago
Thank you for such a quality post.
reply
tom2ow 3 hours ago
[flagged]
reply
m463 4 hours ago
the end struck me - a picture of an os book. I wonder if students these days retain their books after college, or do they get returned as a rental?
reply
linguae 3 hours ago
I'm a professor at a community college in Silicon Valley, and my students use online textbooks. I try to use Creative Commons or other libre textbooks, but sometimes I use paid textbooks when they are heads-and-shoulders better than their libre alternatives. Some e-textbooks can be accessed on a subscription basis. I admit I prefer non-subscription materials, but a colleague advised me that often the book that students learn from is different from a good reference book that students can use once they've already learned the material. For example, my colleagues and I have had great success with an online, interactive textbook for discrete math. While the subscription is unfortunately only valid for the duration of the course, once students have learned discrete math, they could buy a used copy of Rosen's discrete math textbook as a reference.

The nice thing about e-textbooks is not needing to carry around a bunch of heavy books. I remember the tomes I had in my college days, such as Stewart's Calculus.

reply
NooneAtAll3 2 hours ago
just hint students towards anna's archive and then sky's the limit
reply
post-it 3 hours ago
I bought as few textbooks as I could, but the few that I did buy are sitting in my parents' basement bookshelves somewhere.
reply
efxhoy 2 hours ago
Great job on getting the fixes merged!
reply
jmclnx 4 hours ago
Interesting post, it made me wonder. At one time FreeBSD swap usage/logic was far better than what Linux did. Is that still the case ?
reply
man8alexd 2 hours ago
FreeBSD didn’t have memory overcommit and instead used strict swap reservation - each allocated anonymous memory page was supposed to have a corresponding swap page. This required 2x RAM swap space, otherwise you would get “out of swap” when forking a large process. FreeBSD implemented memory overcommit around 2000.
reply
jandrese 2 hours ago
Oh, so that's where that old nugget of wisdom came from! I've heard the rule about making your swap at least 2x your RAM for ages and thought it was just some old rule of thumb from the 80s. I didn't know there used to be a legitimate reason for it.
reply
man8alexd 2 hours ago
reply
0x457 3 hours ago
Yes, It's just not every tool is aware of ZFS ARC. Which is what this post is about. Author just describes in an odd way.
reply
shevy-java 3 hours ago
I remember how NetBSD promoted itself as running on many more toasters than Linux once.

Then some NetBSD dev wrote on their mailing list that this is no longer true. Linux runs on more toasters now. (And also top 500 supercomputers, but toasters are the real metal to the petal test.)

These fights always remind me of:

https://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html

It's an interesting piece of history too. I kind of evaluate it a bit differently, e. g. my summary is "momentum beats academic perfection". Which is not completely what it is about, but it is my own imperfect TL;DR summary.

reply
bee_rider 3 hours ago
This basically fits my stereotype of BSD being a little bit more hardcore while Linux is a little more accessible… when the question was “can you install an OS on a toaster,” BSD had an advantage. Now that normal engineers have to make IOT toasters (for some reason) Linux should have the advantage, right?
reply
sublinear 3 hours ago
Normal engineers don't do that either.
reply
Levitating 3 hours ago
why did that url point me to a scrotum in an egg cup
reply
UnlockedSecrets 3 hours ago
Seems like at a glance that website if it sees a referral from ycombinator, it redirects to that image.... In a private window it loads the 'intended' page.....
reply
tom2ow 3 hours ago
[flagged]
reply
tomeow 3 hours ago
[flagged]
reply
hnloser 4 hours ago
[flagged]
reply
naturalmovement 4 hours ago
ZFS cache. The end.

User installs an unfamiliar server OS with an enterprise filesystem and is stunned when it works differently. I fail to see a teachable moment here.

reply
craftkiller 2 hours ago
I've noticed that the various tools report different amounts of free memory. I appreciate finally having an explanation for why.
reply
toast0 4 hours ago
Sure, but also some tools needed fixing.
reply
shevy-java 3 hours ago
This is why I use Linux. :>

Poor FreeBSD folks though. After so many years trying to present themselves as better alternative, the road just got steeper ...

reply
edoceo 3 hours ago
The OS Crusades are over man
reply
irishcoffee 44 minutes ago
For real though, what is the point of running a bsd on a personal computer? Seems like intentionally handicapping yourself.
reply
vermaden 2 hours ago
No ZFS no problem :)
reply