Fixed now in 2.5.x

This issue still seems to be present in gnome-system-monitor-2.8.1, where the
memory chart doesn't exclude buffers and cache from its total.

Bug confirmed here also, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=75207

well, i think it's more relevant to include cache and buffers in 'used' because
some translations refer to 'physical memory used'.

the label is "Used memory" and actually, cache and buffers is used memory.

The criteria shouldn't be whether something is technically "used", instead
providing a number that's most useful for what you want to do when using the app.

I would say you normally want to see which apps are causing you to not have
enough memory. So you want to show memory that's the app's "fault" (including X
server resources probably, but not including cache that is under the kernel's
control).
The idea is to cast blame.

"Used memory" -> "User memory" ?

Showing "technically used" memory makes the graph useless , as almost always app
memory + cache memory = all the memory , the graph will be pretty much
flat-at-the-top , as it is in 2.8.1 . It should only show app memory , and ( if
you find it important ) add a seperate cruve that shows mem + cache memory.

Ivan Yosifov.

So do you agree that i :
- revert in gnome-2-8
- revert in HEAD and change the label to "user memory" ?

Yes

Fixed in gnome-2-8
http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/procman/src/load-graph.c?r1=1.33&sortby=date&r2=1.33.2.1&only_with_tag=gnome-2-8

and here's for HEAD
http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/procman/src/interface.c?r1=1.117&sortby=date&r2=1.118&only_with_tag=HEAD
http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/procman/src/load-graph.c?r1=1.33&sortby=date&r2=1.34&only_with_tag=HEAD

Joyeux Noël !

Same to you :)

Do you think "user memory" is a good label name to describe the potential available memory for user space application? In my first glance, I took it as the free memory for user app.

I don't understand a single world.

Oh. Sorry. My new comment is:

Gnome-system-monitor uses "user memory" to represent used app memory, but in my first glance, I took it as the free app memory. Do you have a better label?

"non-free user memory"

It looks good for me. Thanks.