Bug 475794
| Summary: | Extremely high usage of memory | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac> |
| Component: | gnome-screensaver | Assignee: | jmccann |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | cschalle, g.bowland, jmccann, mclasen, rstrode |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2009-01-07 09:18:03 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
I've tracked this down, see http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=564548 gnome-screensaver-2.24.1-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-screensaver-2.24.1-2.fc10 *** Bug 476624 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** gnome-screensaver-2.24.1-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update gnome-screensaver'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2008-11308 gnome-screensaver-2.24.1-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |
Description of problem: Hi When I've downgraded from the latest version of gnome-screensaver which eats CPU inside Xorg server - I've just notice one thing - it looks like this application eats over 35MB of my RAM - even if it's not active - i.e. running in the background and waiting for activation. Does it make any sence to consume this amount of Pixmap memory: xrestop - Display: localhost:0 Monitoring 36 clients. XErrors: 1 Pixmaps: 61823K total, Other: 194K total, All: 62018K total res-base Wins GCs Fnts Pxms Misc Pxm mem Other Total PID Identifier 4600000 3 27 0 6 1969 34453K 46K 34499K 7546 gnome-screensaver 3a00000 1168 525 1 493 300 8290K 47K 8338K 9234 [SDL] moving screen when u change resolution - Mozilla Firefox 1800000 0 0 0 1 0 6890K 0B 6890K ? <unknown> 0e00000 8 38 1 7 17 4595K 2K 4598K 18822 nautilus 0000000 1 0 2 0 57 3445K 3K 3448K ? <unknown> 1e00000 0 0 0 1 0 3445K 0B 3445K ? <unknown> The second window in the row - is the firefox window with over 40 opened tabs - and screensaver still takes 4 times more.... - and I use 'blank' screensaver I know that memory is cheap, but I think this could be better ;) It looks like 5 full 32bit screens 1600x1080 saved in the memory... Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): gnome-screensaver-2.24.1-2.fc11.x86_64 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. start gnome session 2. use xrestop 3. Actual results: Expected results: Idealy this would be zero when I do not see screensaver activated - is there really any need to keep pixmaps allocated why the screensaver is not active ? Additional info: