[00:37] <Bluefoxicy> ugh
[00:37] <Bluefoxicy> why does Google Maps lock up either Chromium or my whole desktop?
[00:38] <Bluefoxicy> you know, by maxing out RAM usage whenever I open a tab to it and try to scroll wheel in
[00:38] <sithlord48> its got a fevor and its only cure is more RAM?
[00:39] <Bluefoxicy> I've also found that disabling swap doesn't help:  RAM bloats, pushes out page cache, then the hard disk thrashes re-reading libraries CONSTANTLY.  Why isn't there a page cache lock to OOM in favor of freeing page cache?
[00:39] <Bluefoxicy> Seriously I have 16GB RAM.  The kernel is too stupid to understand that 50MB of page cache and 16.950GB of working memory is going to kill the machine.
[00:42] <Bluefoxicy> ok driving off to starbucks with books to study from.
[00:43] <sarnold> Bluefoxicy: you could always use ulimit -m   to limit chromeium to just eight or ten gigs or whatever
[00:44] <sarnold> Bluefoxicy: maybe ulimit -v would be better. either way it's worth a shot
[02:14] <Bluefoxicy> sarnold:  it doesn't work that way
[02:15] <Bluefoxicy> sarnold:  you can limit the VMA--preventing mapping of file-backed segments et al, which is used for file caches and so forth, which is managed by the kernel--or you can limit nothing.
[02:15] <Bluefoxicy> Trying to limit resident set size of memory per-process or per-user on Linux is really useless.
[02:15] <Bluefoxicy> Second, the point is that the kernel will swap-thrash when you eat up memory even when you have no swap.
[02:17] <Bluefoxicy> sarnold: btw, ulimit -m doesn't do anything
=== LFaraone_ is now known as lfaraone
[04:32] <mlankhorst> infinity: those kind of patches should really have been submitted with a cc to stable, to get it in 10.3 automatically
[06:34] <sarnold> Bluefoxicy: aww, I thought the -m limits had been put back around 2.6.17 era :/
[07:50] <infinity> mlankhorst: Fair enough, not my patch, but can we carry it anyway? :P
[11:42] <mlankhorst> sure
[11:42] <mlankhorst> I won't carry it, but I can commit it to mesa
=== tjaalton_ is now known as tjaalton
[19:51] <geofft> xnox: Logan_: can your capnproto delta be submitted to Debian? want me to file a bug in the BTS?
[19:51] <Logan_> lemme check
[19:52] <geofft> Debian has 0.4.1, so it seems like it'd be nice to be able to sync
[19:52] <Logan_> it looks like my delta was already incorporated
[19:52] <Logan_> they're using dh-autoreconf in Debian now as well
[19:53] <Logan_> not sure about all of Dmitri's stuff, though
[19:53] <Logan_> *Dimitri
[19:54] <geofft> yeah, Debian doesn't appear to be multiarching it