inefficiency of how osx handling memory

anyone notice that? when the computer has been on and used for a lengthy period of time the free memory seems to drop to a nominal level (for my last reboot it was down to 42mb) where as the inactive memory was way up at 2+gb

besides rebooting, what are the other ways to free up those memory or is that an non-issue?

i have not test my machine further because i don't know what will happen(maybe the nuclear reactor will explode in the state if i push too far? )

but if anyone has a clue, please enlighten me

note: this is not a windows vs. osx comparison, i know i can turn on windows for years nowadays, i am looking for solution instead.

 

This is a typical and designed behavior of Linux and given that OSX has some roots in *nix I would expect it to act similarly. Of course I could be wrong and it's a huge memory leak, but I doubt it.

Basically your system expands memory cache to use all unused memory. If you open a new program or another program needs additional memory it is freed up in short order.

 

Someone explained to me that it basically uses as much unused memory as it can (cache), but it'll free it up when another program needs it. No need to worry I think.

edit: late post

 

i tried to close all the program and the inactive memory is still 2gb where as the free memory is around 40mb

unless the inactive memory will be used when a new program is open, the free memory is too small


the inactive memory seems to be a dumping ground of the used free memory and i am not seeing a recycle in the use of them either, is this normal?

 

People seriously need to learn how to use the search function as well as google. But once again,

Read:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1342

OS X will make an effort to keep things in RAM even if no active application is using it. This is efficient and desirable.

 

If it makes you feel better, try iFreemem. Bottom line is OS X manages memory effectively and efficiently. Thats to say when memory is available is caches as much as possible and when memory is needed it reuses the oldest memory not actually in use.

I was used to a 4gb MB/MBP/iMac and I thought I'd need something like iFreeMem form my MBA. Turns out with a dozen or so Mac apps, a VM running XP and a few Windows apps and it works great without any third party help.

 

This is what Windows Vista does now too. It's not a memory leak, and it does have enormous benefits.

 

Not using Free memory is inefficient for an operating system.

 

To an incoming application that needs more memory, inactive memory and free memory are the exact same thing. They are both available to be used by new programs. To overall system performance, inactive memory is better since things are cached and if you use the same old program again it'll already be in memory and will load faster. If you use a new program, it'll be able to take over inactive memory just as well as free memory so there is no disadvantage.

 

Exactly, this is advantageous, not disadvantageous. Inactive memory can be used by any program just like free memory, but having the OS turn the free memory into inactive gives you better OS-wide performance. Basically, instead of the OS using a teeny amount of RAM and a lot of paging memory even when the RAM is free, it will use that free RAM for itself until it is needed by another program, at which point the OS will allocated the paging memory and the program will be free to use the inactive memory.

At least that has always been my understanding.

 

I haven't shut down or restarted my Mac Pro (desktop) in 169 days.

There is no need to shut it down. I occasionally need to relaunch Firefox though, because it has problems after a few weeks.

(The Mac Pro doubles as a space heater in my room, so that I don't have to use the fire hazard space heater)

 

OSX will give open applications as much RAM as it can even if the application is not using all of it, this way your open applications run as well as possible. When the RAM is needed by another application, OSX will reallocate the memory. Your memory usage may look high but you won't run out of memory as fast as the figures suggest.

 

*sigh*....

 

This is a misperception in my opinion, the wired/inactive or watever are like free memory being on standby to be used readily, which is why you boot up things much more quickly than the first time you do so.....when there's almost no inactive memory and lots of free memory initially.

 

is there a need to say same thing x times?

 

Screw Home Economics.....they should be teaching kids how to use Google and find answers to their questions.