[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Kudos on memory usage in 0.2.X

To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Kudos on memory usage in 0.2.X
From: Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2008 16:44:04 -0500
Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:44:12 -0500
In-reply-to: <cbb8f04c0811091340wdf6c67n4f6084e620988a0a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <cbb8f04c0811091340wdf6c67n4f6084e620988a0a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 03:40:30PM -0600, Matt LaPlante wrote:
> bandwidth.  My one gripe was that the Tor daemon in 0.1.X sucked a lot
> of my very limited memory allocation, even when not accepting exits.

It sure did. Mainly on Linux.

> Having recently upgraded to 0.2.X due to its inclusion in Intrepid,
> I've seen a *drastic* improvement in memory efficiency.  The new
> version appears magnitudes lighter on resources using the same
> configuration.  This is a big deal to me, and I just wanted to give
> thanks to the developers for focusing on performance as well as
> functionality.  Keep up the good work!

Great. Glad you like it.

And if you like 0.2.0.x's memory usage, you'll like 0.2.1.x's even more! :)

--Roger

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Kudos on memory usage in 0.2.X
  - From: slush

References:
- Kudos on memory usage in 0.2.X
  - From: Matt LaPlante

Prev by Author: Re: DDoS attacks via TOR?
Next by Author: Re: Kudos on memory usage in 0.2.X
Previous by thread: Kudos on memory usage in 0.2.X
Next by thread: Re: Kudos on memory usage in 0.2.X
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread