Re: Memory usage report

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
> Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 16:27:20 +0200
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, yantar92@gmail.com
> 
> > But in all of the cases where people complained about such huge RSS,
> > the GC report shows a very small Lisp memory usage, so that helm cache
> > cannot be the culprit.  It's something else, whether related to
> > helm-ff-keep-cached-candidates or some other feature.
> 
> I just gave you an example of the opposite, and then you say "in all of
> the cases"?  I'm not sure what you are arguing here, or even why you are
> arguing about this: Giving users a convenient way to examine (and rule
> out) certain memory usage problems surely can't be bad in itself.

We are talking about two different use cases, I think: I was talking
about the problems described in bug#43389.

I have no objections to producing more detailed memory usage reports
based on Lisp data.  I'm just saying that I usually find that not very
helpful for investigating problems like the bug mentioned above.

I'm sorry I annoyed you.