Mon, 18 Jul 2011 22:19:18 -0700 (PDT), rodericliu wrote:
> top - 06:56:45 up 382 days
Don't you need any kernel patches? :-)
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 28741 root 20 0 2953m 2.9g 652 S 23 50.4 2779:50 lsyncd
...
> Inotify watching 763434 directories
...
> Why would lsyncd uses so much memory?
Each directory watch needs up to 1 KB,
see https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lsyncd/KZfQE9VUZFw/twTMjxWa41wJ
That would explain 0.8 GB of your 2.9 GB, the rest is
really strange.
Sven
For a while fanotify looked a very interesting alternative which
allows to make one watch for a whole filesystem. But unfortunately it
does not report move events at all, making it unusable for Lsyncd.
Currently we have two major notification systems on Linux` both
tailored to be a specific use case:
* inotify: made for GUIs who display one directory and are only
interested in a few directories
* fanotify: made for malware protection, and trimmed very much to those needs.
None is really suitable for indexing or syncing mechanisms like
Lsyncd, like for example Mac OSX´ fsevents interface which allows with
one handle to watch everything on the system. Apple wrote it for their
hotspot index machine, and on OSX 10.5.5 Lsyncd can hijacks that
interface.
Inotify works, but uses tons of memory for large trees.
Get the Linux´ kernel fixed and Lsyncd will improve on that ;-)
kind regards, Axel
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lsyncd" group.
> To post to this group, send email to lsy...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lsyncd+un...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lsyncd?hl=en.
>
>