Open... and close... and open...


Yes I compare x86-64 and armhf. You're right, that the memory footprint might be different on these architectures. But I think it will be similar...
Screen size and using another Desktop-Environment might give me back 300MB of RAM. Java-Development is not really affected by this. The running Java-Programm has no IDE.

I will also be happy 2GB but if possible I would prefer the 4GB version for stated reasons.

I have 48GB of RAM on my home desktop computer running Debian Stretch. It is fairly common for it to show 30-40GB RAM in use during simple file copies (running backups for example). RAM used on a modern Linux or Windows desktop does NOT equal the RAM required for the applications running. Both use any and all available RAM for caching - storage included.

I am not discounting that your 64bit Linux desktop is using that much RAM during the operations you are performing.

However, if you strip the system down to 32bit & 2GB, then what does it do? Does it still run? Is it fluid enough to use?
 
I have 48GB of RAM on my home desktop computer running Debian Stretch. It is fairly common for it to show 30-40GB RAM in use during simple file copies (running backups for example). RAM used on a modern Linux or Windows desktop does NOT equal the RAM required for the applications running. Both use any and all available RAM for caching - storage included.

I am not discounting that your 64bit Linux desktop is using that much RAM during the operations you are performing.

However, if you strip the system down to 32bit & 2GB, then what does it do? Does it still run? Is it fluid enough to use?

I'm aware of the fact, that linux always fills the ram with buffer and caching. But here is my output of `free -h`. As you can see, there is not much left for buffer and cache...
Code:
              gesamt       benutzt     frei      gemns.  Puffer/Cache verfügbar
Speicher:        3,7G        3,1G        127M        111M        517M        233M
Auslagerungsspeicher:        3,8G        607M        3,2G
 
No, it was ED misreading the chip number. It was the DDR3L version they got.

Right, but it turned out to be a false alarm. They did have the memory chip they intended to have, there was just a momentary confusion.

Well. That's a problem with jumping in and out of IRC. You don't get the whole picture. Sorry for getting anyone's hopes up. Huge thanks to those that did get the whole story.
 
Back
Top