KDE

NAVIGATION
CATEGORIES
REFERRENCE
LINKS
  • Konqueror eating my resources

    8 answers - 363 bytes - related search similar search Add To My Delicious Add To My Stumble Upon Add To My Google Mark Add To My Facebook Add To My Digg Add To My Reddit

    Hi all, Is there an explanation for why Konqueror keeps eating my
    resources and I'm just seeing usual web pages? 6 tabs open only. Check
    this line from top:
    4227 pmatos 22 0 181m 150m 21m R 44.0 29.8 28:49.29 konqueror
    CPU: 44
    Mem: 29.8?
    I have 512Mgs and Konqueror is eating 30%?
    Why is this? Is this normal?
    Regards,
  • No.1 | | 445 bytes | |

    Saturday 11 November 2006 19:16, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
    Hi all, Is there an explanation for why Konqueror keeps eating my
    resources and I'm just seeing usual web pages? 6 tabs open only. Check
    this line from top:

    4227 pmatos 22 0 181m 150m 21m R 44.0 29.8 28:49.29 konqueror
    CPU: 44
    Mem: 29.8?

    The numbers reported by these simple tools like ps or top can be a bit
    misleading, see and

    Cheers,
    Kevin
  • No.2 | | 1273 bytes | |

    Kevin Krammer wrote:
    Saturday 11 November 2006 19:16, Paulo J. Matos wrote:

    >Hi all, Is there an explanation for why Konqueror keeps eating my
    >resources and I'm just seeing usual web pages? 6 tabs open only. Check
    >this line from top:
    >>

    >4227 pmatos 22 0 181m 150m 21m R 44.0 29.8 28:49.29 konqueror
    >CPU: 44
    >Mem: 29.8?
    >
    >

    The numbers reported by these simple tools like ps or top can be a bit
    misleading, see and

    Cheers,
    Kevin

    This message is from the kde-linux mailing list.
    Account management:
    Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
    More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

    Yea, Seamonkey, or Mozilla, does about the same thing. Maybe it is
    counting cache or something but you are not alone on this type of report.

    If you close Konqueror and restart it, it should go back to a reasonable
    amount. That is why I think it is cacheing sites, images usually. I
    like this since I am on a very slow dial-up.

    Dale

    :-) :-)

    This message is from the kde-linux mailing list.
    Account management:
    Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
    More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
  • No.3 | | 234 bytes | |

    11/11/06, Kevin Krammer <kevin.krammer (AT) gmx (DOT) atwrote:
    The numbers reported by these simple tools like ps or top can be a bit
    misleading, see and
    Thanks for the refs, nice to know this.
    Cheers,
    Kevin
  • No.4 | | 830 bytes | |

    11/11/06, Dale <dalek (AT) exceedtech (DOT) netwrote:
    Yea, Seamonkey, or Mozilla, does about the same thing. Maybe it is
    counting cache or something but you are not alone on this type of report.

    I can understand that but that sometimes really pisses me off. :-\

    If you close Konqueror and restart it, it should go back to a reasonable
    amount. That is why I think it is cacheing sites, images usually. I
    like this since I am on a very slow dial-up.

    Indeed, I have to restart it sometimes reminds me of using windows,
    which sucks. Still KDE is the best! :-)

    Dale

    :-) :-)

    This message is from the kde-linux mailing list.
    Account management:
    Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
    More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
    >
    >
    >
  • No.5 | | 2071 bytes | |

    Paulo J. Matos wrote:
    11/11/06, Dale <dalek (AT) exceedtech (DOT) netwrote:

    >Yea, Seamonkey, or Mozilla, does about the same thing. Maybe it is
    >counting cache or something but you are not alone on this type of report.
    >>

    >
    >

    I can understand that but that sometimes really pisses me off. :-\


    >If you close Konqueror and restart it, it should go back to a reasonable
    >amount. That is why I think it is cacheing sites, images usually. I
    >like this since I am on a very slow dial-up.
    >>

    >
    >

    Indeed, I have to restart it sometimes reminds me of using windows,
    which sucks. Still KDE is the best! :-)


    >Dale
    >>

    >:-) :-)
    >
    >This message is from the kde-linux mailing list.
    >Account management:
    >Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
    >More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    >


    I didn't mean restart the computer, just restart the app. Keep in mind
    that Linux uses memory a lot differently than windoze. It is very
    efficient. I can truthfully say this since I have had uptimes as long
    as 10 months, the longer Linux runs, the faster it gets, especially
    after a few days of normal use. Using cache is really a good thing. I
    have 1GB of ram here and it doesn't take long to fill that up with disk
    cache. It makes a huge difference on start times for big apps like
    , Gimp etc etc. That is really a good thing.

    It's working as it should I am fairly sure of that. I wouldn't be to
    concerned unless something takes up all your memory.

    Dale

    :-) :-)

    This message is from the kde-linux mailing list.
    Account management:
    Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
    More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
  • No.6 | | 621 bytes | |

    Sunday 12 November 2006 07:31, Dale wrote:
    I didn't mean restart the computer, just restart the app. *Keep in mind
    that Linux uses memory a lot differently than windoze. *It is very
    efficient.

    True enough, but that does nothing to suggest there is no memory
    leaks in Kong. I've often suspected there were some but don't
    know how to go about proving it.

    There were known leaks in prior versions of FireFox
    which persisted for more than one release. Just leaving it sit on any
    page that periodically refreshed itself could bring a machine to its knees
    in a couple days.
  • No.7 | | 797 bytes | |

    Monday 13 November 2006 03:40, John Andersen wrote:
    Sunday 12 November 2006 07:31, Dale wrote:
    I didn't mean restart the computer, just restart the app. *Keep in mind
    that Linux uses memory a lot differently than windoze. *It is very
    efficient.

    True enough, but that does nothing to suggest there is no memory
    leaks in Kong. I've often suspected there were some but don't
    know how to go about proving it.

    There were known leaks in prior versions of FireFox
    which persisted for more than one release. Just leaving it sit on any
    page that periodically refreshed itself could bring a machine to its knees
    in a couple days.

    Konqueror have leaks. I have just such a page; unfortunatelyt it's a webapp
    not available for the public.
  • No.8 | | 795 bytes | |

    I'm really sorry but no matter what you say (I even turned cache off),
    Konqueror is definitely having a lot of problems in KDE3.5.5.
    I don't recall having such problems in previous versions (3.5.2, for
    example). It gets to the point with 15 tabs open that my computer just
    doesn't run anymore. Mouse doesn't move. Konqueror is 100% on CPU for
    several minutes, and memory usage is high, no matter the correctness
    of top.
    If I'm watching a movie, no more movie, if I'm in a skype call, no
    more call, if I'm doing whatever, everything just blocks and I'm don't
    even know why, be it cache (which is turned off) or not.

    :-( Any way to diagnose this? I would like to help check out the
    problem if I can.

    Regards,

Re: Konqueror eating my resources


max 4000 letters.
Your nickname that display:
In order to stop the spam: 2 + 1 =
QUESTION ON "KDE"

EMSDN.COM