Re: [Ethereal-users] Large memory footprint

[Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:01:55PM -0700, Chris Robertson wrote:
> That's the amount of memory allocated to the Ethereal process itself.
> Depending on the system the X server would have 10-20MB (I think it may have
> hit 60MB with the largest files) allocated seperately, note the amount of
> memory allocated to X doesn't change drastically when running Ethereal
> locally or remotely with the large capture files.  

> So I would see a 300MB (600MB if local) process for Ethereal

Wait.

So the amount of virtual address space *Ethereal* has changes by a
factor of two merely by changing the X server to which XLib connects?

That's *very* bizarre.

Does it make a difference whether, when running locally, you connect to
the local display or to "{hostname}:0.0"?  I.e., is this a
local-connection vs. TCP issue, or is it that the two X servers behave
differently?

Is the remote machine running the same OS as your workstation, on the
same type of processor?  Are they running the same versions of GTK+,
GLib, and the X client libraries?