From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: memory leak Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:06:27 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <200604291406.k3TE6Rhc001999@jane.dms.auburn.edu> References: <200604290156.k3T1uecx028681@jane.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1146319651 15273 80.91.229.2 (29 Apr 2006 14:07:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 14:07:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 29 16:07:30 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZq6b-0007Re-WF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 16:07:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZq6b-0001oE-Cj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:07:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZq6P-0001mH-1M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:07:17 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FZq6N-0001kH-3g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:07:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FZq6M-0001jv-Pl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:07:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FZq9j-0004S2-V2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:10:44 -0400 Original-Received: from jane.dms.auburn.edu (jane.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.201]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k3TE7DHM024008; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:07:13 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from jane.dms.auburn.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jane.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k3TE6SOb002002; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:06:28 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by jane.dms.auburn.edu (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/Submit) id k3TE6Rhc001999; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:06:27 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: jane.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: bob@rattlesnake.com In-reply-to: (bob@rattlesnake.com) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:53588 Archived-At: Robert Chassell wrote: My normal instances of Emacs do have a large number of large files open at once, but the numbers I reported are for when they are killed. How does memory get consumed after Emacs processes are killed? For me, no appreciable amount of extra memory seems to get consumed with `emacs -Q -nbc' before Emacs is killed, but I do not have anything special like desktop enabled. After Emacs is killed, all of Emacs' memory should be given back to the OS rather quickly, which happens for me whenever I kill Emacs. What should I look for after successfully running `save-buffers-kill-emacs' on all instances of Emacs? This beats me. Maybe some other memory consuming process being launched and surviving the killing of Emacs. Are you running top with processes ordered by memory consumption? Sincerely, Luc.