News:

NOTICE: This forum is mostly an archive, though new posts are allowed. Registration may require manual admin activation. After registering visit https://bitsum.com/contact/ to request account activation.

Main Menu

What about "Commit" size?

Started by Coldblackice, August 10, 2015, 11:29:15 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Coldblackice

When smart-trim activates, I see that it doesn't have any effect on my system's overall commit size/limit. This is especially troublesome with Internet Explorer (which isn't my main browser; I just have to use it at various times).

Is it possible to trim a program's commit-grab?

BenYeeHua

Well, it is Private size, which is Page File+RAM.
For the commit size in Windows Task Manager, it is also Page File+RAM, but not limited to Private size.(it should be Private size+Shared Memory)

So nothing you can do about this, unless you change the software/windows. :)

Coldblackice

Quote from: BenYeeHua on August 11, 2015, 05:32:09 AM
Well, it is Private size, which is Page File+RAM.
For the commit size in Windows Task Manager, it is also Page File+RAM, but not limited to Private size.(it should be Private size+Shared Memory)

So nothing you can do about this, unless you change the software/windows. :)

Thanks Ben.

Hmm, I'm confused though -- when I add up all the running programs' memory/working-sets, it doesn't add up to the current commit-size. Is there a way to see how much each program has requested for commit?

Perhaps I'm understanding it incorrectly, but my understanding is that commit-size is basically how much memory a program has asked Windows to reserve for it, like "Yo Mr. Windows, I need to make a reservation for 1GB more of memory, can you put my name down for that?", and then Windows makes the reservation and pushes the system commit-size up, as it gets closer to the limit.

Is this correct? If not, why are the memory columns not adding up to the current commit-size, falling short of it?

Is it possible to see how much commit-size each program has requested?

Jeremy Collake

It's falling short because of system memory that has been committed AND processes not listed by Lasso, namely tamper-resistant processes of most security software. Simply accessing them with read-only rights causes them to log a 'tamper detection event', thus we had to just entirely ignore them. Otherwise, it should add up.
Software Engineer. Bitsum LLC.

BenYeeHua

And also system(process), it contain a lot of driver inside, like the whole Anti-virus Engine are inside of it. ;)