Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 4081980
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 20, 20262026-05-20T18:07:49+00:00 2026-05-20T18:07:49+00:00

This is in C++ on CentOS 64bit using G++ 4.1.2. We’re writing a test

  • 0

This is in C++ on CentOS 64bit using G++ 4.1.2.

We’re writing a test application to load up the memory usage on a system by n Gigabytes. The idea being that the overall system load gets monitored through SNMP etc. So this is just a way of exercising the monitoring.

What we’ve seen however is that simply doing:

char* p = new char[1000000000];

doesn’t affect the memory used as shown in either top or free -m

The memory allocation only seems to become “real” once the memory is written to:

memcpy(p, 'a', 1000000000);   //shows an increase in mem usage of 1GB

But we have to write to all of the memory, simply writing to the first element does not show an increase in the used memory:

p[0] = 'a';    //does not show an increase of 1GB.

Is this normal, has the memory actually been allocated fully? I’m not sure if it’s the tools we are using (top and free -m) that are displaying incorrect values or whether there is something clever going on in the compiler or in the runtime and/or kernel.

This behavior is seen even in a debug build with optimizations turned off.

It was my understanding that a new[] allocated the memory immediately. Does the C++ runtime delay this actual allocation until later on when it is accessed. In that case can an out of memory exception be deferred until well after the actual allocation of the memory until the memory is accessed?

As it is it is not a problem for us, but it would be nice to know why this is occurring the way it is!

Cheers!

Edit:

I don’t want to know about how we should be using Vectors, this isn’t OO / C++ / the current way of doing things etc etc. I just want to know why this is happening the way it is, rather than have suggestions for alternative ways of trying it.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-20T18:07:50+00:00Added an answer on May 20, 2026 at 6:07 pm

    Please look up for overcommit. Linux by default doesn’t reserve memory until it is accessed. And if you end up by needing more memory than available, you don’t get an error but a random process is killed. You can control this behavior with /proc/sys/vm/*.

    IMO, overcommit should be a per process setting, not a global one. And the default should be no overcommit.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I'm using gcc4.4.4 and gdb on 64bit Linux centos 5.7, compiling to ansi C.
I've done this many times on 32 bit CentOS and everything went ok without
I am a bit puzzled by this strange behavior on CentOs 5.4 when starting
I compiled python 2.6.4 for centos 5.3 and find this issue that os.path.getmtime() or
I'm working with libpcap in C on linux (centos) and I'm following this guide
I want to tail multiple files (and follow them) in CentOS, I've tried this:
I'm trying to install gevent on a fresh EC2 CentOS 5.3 64-bit system. Since
I just deployed an application to a new server, and although I'm using virtualenv,
Seen with gdb on openSUSE, CentOS, Fedora, and Ubuntu: This gdb was configured as
This post says that you need a 64 bit system for MongoDB if your

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.