|
I have two 8-year old laptops than can only go to 8gb (and they're both maxed out).
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
My newish work laptop came with 32gb of ram, it's one of the few things I like about it; as with a crapton of browser tabs and multiple copies of visual studio on my old 16gb machine I could find myself swapping enough that even with an SSD to read/write to my system started lagging noticeably.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
8gb is fine for Win10. You must have some piece of software that is running in an infinite loop allocating memory for variables until you run out of space.
|
|
|
|
|
Fun fact of the day!
Each process on your PC has something called "Modified Page List Bytes" which is additional RAM that a process is using that is hidden from Task Manager.
This amount happily sits at around 8GB on my 32GB Desktop Machine. This amount cannot be picked up by Task Manager, and requires specialized RAM-based process monitors to detect (RAMMap, in-depth investigation into Windows Performance Counters, etc).
Whilst using such methods can tell you the total amount of invisible RAM being used, there is no way to tell what is using it, if something is leaking it, or even how to easily free it up (Although closing a process will free up its associated modified bytes)
Task Manager can show you at 30% total Memory usage when in reality you could be sitting at 90%+ and start tossing "Out Of Memory" exceptions any moment now. Disable your Pagefile to drastically speed up this process to experience this first hand 
Have fun :p
-= Reelix =-
modified 26-Aug-19 13:46pm.
|
|
|
|
|
That's really great information and explains some additional things I've seen in recent past where things have crashed even though I have 0.5-1GB free (according to TaskManager).
Thanks for posting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote Investigator is fantastic! I always enjoy their articles. Just last week I read one on the quote:
To Avoid Criticism,
Say Nothing,
Do Nothing,
Be Nothing
|
|
|
|
|
Even though it is scvhost.exe, it doesn't mean that Windows 10 is at fault.
Exit Android Studio and you will see your RAM freed up.
From my experience, scvhost is generic service something. It can be called by anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
I use Android Studio + Emulator + Firefox + Thunderbird on an older AMD A10 on Ubuntu Linux and the whole thing seldom goes over 6GB of ram.
Sometimes I have IntelliJ open at the same time all well under 8GB.
I guess there's something in your windows.
|
|
|
|
|
Check this out. I was just browsing through a folder and I played an mp4 file and the video played and then out of nowhere I got this message*:
"Because you're accessing sensitive info, you need to verify your password."
https://i.stack.imgur.com/vbbGC.png[^]
What!?!
I couldn't even tell what app was causing this to appear. It seems to be the app that is playing the mp4 video. Crazy, microsoft. Really crazy.
I did not enter my password and the app played the video and everything else works the same. Seems so fake!
*I blotted my valid MS login email out.
|
|
|
|
|
It may be the video player: some of them try to access metadata online I think.
Which player were you using?
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: It may be the video player: some of them try to access metadata online I think.
Again, I believe you are correct.
OriginalGriff wrote: Which player were you using?
That was part of the craziness. It was the built-in win10 one I think? 
Can't really tell. There is nothing in the Store App that lets me know what is running. I do see "Movies & TV" so I think that is what it is called.
The additionally weird thing is that I've played the video a number of times again to see if the popup would come back and it didn't. 
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm,
raddevus wrote: "Because you're accessing sensitive info, you need to verify your password."
Do you have OneDrive as your default save location?
raddevus wrote: *I blotted my valid MS login email out
*I have X-ray vision.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
I don’t have OneDrive as a default save location on my machine.
I wouldn’t ever want that really.
However, it is possible that the recent big update (1903 recently installed on my machine) May have changed something. However, I checked and that file is in my Downloads directory.
|
|
|
|
|
It is a real popup but I agree that they should make it clear which app is behind it.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
How very nice of them to add such an intrusive "feature" (which I'll bet no-one asked for, and which sends reams of personal information to their servers), instead of fixing the 1.3 Billion bugs in the OS.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I had one of those from Office365 a few weeks back. Absolutely no suggestion of what application needed my password. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: I had one of those from Office365 a few weeks back. Absolutely no suggestion of what application needed my password.
Yep, I've seen those too. Super annoying! This is the _new_ UI 
|
|
|
|
|
mostly because i hated opening my browser just to answer simple questions.
trouble is, this violates google's ToS.
That's the only reason i haven't posted it here.
That and I use it for less than upstanding tasks as well.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
So ... why are you mentioning it now?
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
because my mind wandered to weird places regarding the lockpicking comments and because i recently saw an article here on doing some less than upstanding things to exploit software vulnerabilities - the kind that bypass DEP.
so part of me is wondering if i should post it - if i can find the source. i actually made it as part of a larger search engine scraping tool so if i gutted the google specific bits i could legally speaking "sanitize it"
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
You mean like this one[^]?
I don't see how or why that should violate google's search tos, given that it's just a command-line search, and not automated.
Calling it repeatedly from a shell with an input file of search terms would be considered "automated", but calling a browser repeatedly from a shell with an input file of search terms would be exactly the same thing, so its being a command-line tool makes no difference whatsoever.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
You make a valid point, which I hadn't considered. Although I've been known to call it from a script from time to time 
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: I don't see how or why that should violate google's search tos,
GIT Repo said: FEATURES:
...
Fast and clean (no ads, stray URLs or clutter), custom color
Maybe because they probably can't make so much business if there is many people using it?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
