On Fri, 2004-02-06 at 19:54, Steve wrote:
> On Friday 06 February 2004 06:48 pm, Logan Tygart wrote:
> > Hello Slugadonia!
> > Thursday morning, I downloaded and compiled the 2.6.2 kernel source
> > on my experimental box. My experimental box runs Debian Sid, Pentium
> > III etc. etc. blah blah.
> > That said, I was wondering if anyone else is running the shiny new
> > "stable" kernel. I do not notice much difference, workstation wise,
> > from the 2.4.24 kernel. Open Office 1.1 still opens as slow as it
> > did with 2.4.24. I use Gnome 2.4 with Sawfish and it still runs as
> > smooth as ever, but what appears to me to be the same speed. The
> > only physical difference I have noticed is the xscreensaver, "Sphere"
> > runs about 10 times faster than before.
> > One good thing, I must note about this switch over, is I haven't had
> > any Oopses, yet, like I did when I switched from 2.2 to 2.4.
> > What have you guys seen?
> >
> > The Logan
>
> Maybe your hard drive is not running at a decent speed. This would make
> all the difference. Especially loading OO.
>
> Run hdparm -tT /dev/hda (or whatever is your drive)
>
> My numbers are something like 580MB from cache and shy of 50MB from
> disk. When I start OO it's up in 7 seconds flat. (They are 133MHz).
Nah, I thought about that too and tweaked it out, my drive is
screaming. I think it might be my JRE, but I am not worried about it as
OO runs very fast after it initially starts.
But my question was not about my HD it was about kernel performance. =)
The Logan
-- 22:20:01 up 31 days, 2:18, 4 users, load average: 0.06, 0.45, 0.74 War is God's way of teaching Americans about geography. -- Ambrose Bierce Registered Linux User 277727 ICQ 72101412
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:36:16 EDT