Re:Everything old is new again: memory optimization
by pjc50 on Friday March 27, 2026 @11:52AM
(#47544333)
As pointed out below, quite a lot of that isn't in RAM - see "working set".
There's a common noob complaint about "Linux using all my RAM!" where people are confused about the headline free/buffers numbers. If there's a reasonable chance data could be used again soon it's better to leave it in RAM; if the RAM is needed for something else, the current contents will get paged out. Having a chunk of RAM be genuinely unallocated to anything is doing nothing for you.
Re:Everything old is new again: memory optimization
by fluoridation on Friday March 27, 2026 @12:46PM
(#47545100)
Nitpick: What you're describing is the disk cache. If a process requests more memory than is free, the OS will not page out pages used for the cache, it will simply either release them (if they're on the read cache) or flush them (if they're on the write cache).
Re:Everything old is new again: memory optimization
by HappMacDonald on Saturday March 28, 2026 @08:12AM
(#47553864)
Of course it's doing something for you. Room to defrag other areas of RAM, room to load something new without moving something else out of the way first.
Your perspective sounds like the concept that space in a room does nothing for you until/unless you cram it full of hoarded items.
Re:Everything old is new again: memory optimization
by Melatonic on Saturday March 28, 2026 @02:52PM
(#47557252)
If we're talking about a storage locker that's instantly reconfigurable then it is probably better to be approximately filling it.
Why would anyone buy a locker 5x the size of their needs ?
Re:Everything old is new again: memory optimization
by groby_b on Friday March 27, 2026 @08:42PM
(#47550301)
If you didn't have the "random" buffers, you'd complain how slow it is. Syntax highlighting? Needs a boatload of caching to be efficient. Code search? Hey, you want a cached code index. Plugins? Gotta run your python code somewhere.
Run vi/nano/micro/joe - they're optimizing for memory to some extent. vi clocks in at under 8 MB. You're giving up a lot of "nice" things to get there.
But isn't it crazy how we throw out so much memory just because of random buffers? It feels wrong to me