Comment by anonymous908213
4 hours ago
I truly hate, more than anything else in the tech discourse, that this gets trotted out every time the discussion of RAM comes up. "unUsED rAM iS wASTED RAm", always used to defend and justify abhorrent and incompetent software development practices. Even with 32gb, I routinely run into out-of-memory crashes on a near-daily basis with workloads that should not in principle be anywhere near that usage.
If they were making decisions based on RAM, they were almost certainly encountering real-world issues which prompted looking at their usage statistics in the first place, rather than just looking up their RAM usage metrics for funsies.
This is talk about how the OS uses that RAM to make your software better.
But to that point, having to explain to people why this 32GB machine with two processes using 10GB each can not, in fact, fit another 10GB process because the response times of the two existing processes relies heavily on that “unused” memory that is actually part of the working set of the machine. And also occasionally one of those services spikes to 14GB so what happens when that happens?
So in that regard showing that memory as used has advantages for avoiding arguments with people who are not equipped to have their half of the argument in a useful and meaningful way.
I think the point is not that one should not look at RAM use, but be careful when looking at it since total RAM use may include the amount that is used for disk cache which will fill to use whatever is available (and will be freed back if necessary).
It makes sense to watch memory use but one should make sure to discount the amount used for disk caching from the total.