| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Eagle_
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Jun 2004
Posts: 119
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:01 pm Post subject: Low preformence |
 |
|
Hi to all,
I cant say i know everything i am doing with my Gentoo, but today i can say i have a working 2.6.9-r1 working kernel.
I would like to say here in this new topic that i found in the last few weeks woking to much with out a good eplanition. I looked to my memory menagment (I have 512mg) and i saw it mustly used and i dont know on what and the computer dont use my swap partition.
This is a plot of my partition use: | Quote: |
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda4 31G 21G 11G 67% /
/dev/hda3 5.6G 2.0G 3.7G 35% /home
none 252M 0 252M 0% /dev/shm
|
This is a clance on the optput of top: | Quote: |
top - 03:53:49 up 20 min, 5 users, load average: 0.49, 1.08, 1.16
Tasks: 87 total, 5 running, 82 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 9.9% us, 3.3% sy, 0.0% ni, 85.5% id, 0.7% wa, 0.3% hi, 0.3% si
Mem: 515160k total, 513332k used, 1828k free, 270028k buffers
Swap: 1005472k total, 0k used, 1005472k free, 129304k cached
|
I must say i dont have 5 users on my computer, so i dont know what 5 users means, or i just dont want to believe its true...
Please dont be shy to send your coments or requests for othere information on my platform.
Thanks
Eagle
Eagle |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
woolsherpahat
Guru
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 347
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What filesystem are you using? Some are faster than others and react more adversly to being full. Do you have DMA enabled for your hard drive? If you're using KDE are your /etc/hosts and loopback network device in order?
_________________
The Real OTW
"Blue skies and high fives" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spockmeat
n00b
Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 39
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
about the number of users, that's a bit misleading. run top, and open a new console window and watch what happens 
basically, every console window counts as a new user logged in, plus your account you logged into the system with, etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eagle_
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Jun 2004
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi 10k1,
I am using Reiserfs file system for /dev/hda4 and /dev/hda3.
I have IBM TinkPad T41. I looked at IBM site and it seems i have DMA support but i dont think i enable it. I also dont know where to check it.
I uselly use XFCE4 because it preserve my battery the must (6.5h when i am using only LyX and after i dont few adjustments).
I dont have a library called /etc/hosts.
Eagle |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woolsherpahat
Guru
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 347
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Okay, reiserfs should be pretty fast. To check for DMA-support on your hard drive, try using the command 'hdparm -tvT /dev/hdX".
For Example:
| Code: | root@iBook loki # hdparm -tvT /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
multcount = 0 (off)
IO_support = 0 (default 16-bit)
unmaskirq = 1 (on)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 256 (on)
geometry = 16383/255/63, sectors = 40007761920, start = 0
Timing cached reads: 1008 MB in 2.01 seconds = 501.57 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 82 MB in 3.02 seconds = 27.17 MB/sec |
KDE relies on the loopback network interface and the correct entry in /etc/hostname for a lot of things, if you're loopback device isn't configured, KDE (and probably Gnome too) will run really slow. Since you're using XFCE this probably isn't an issue, but what are the results of 'ifconfig lo' and 'ping localhost'?
_________________
The Real OTW
"Blue skies and high fives" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eagle_
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Jun 2004
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi 10k1,
Those are the results:
DMA: | Quote: | /dev/hda4:
multcount = 16 (on)
IO_support = 0 (default 16-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 256 (on)
geometry = 65535/16/63, sectors = 32932085760, start = 13819680
Timing cached reads: 1660 MB in 2.00 seconds = 829.30 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 100 MB in 3.06 seconds = 32.72 MB/sec
|
ping localhost: | Quote: | PING localhost (127.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from localhost (127.0.0.1): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.029 ms
64 bytes from localhost (127.0.0.1): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.029 ms
64 bytes from localhost (127.0.0.1): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.029 ms |
and my ifconfig lo:
| Quote: | lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:166 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:166 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:13888 (13.5 Kb) TX bytes:13888 (13.5 Kb)
|
It seems i have DMA but i dont know if 0.03ms is good or bad, i think that there is networks faster then this.
Eagle |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
idkwiam187
n00b
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 46
Location: Virginia, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The reason it seems that so much memory is used is that the way Linux handles memory management it keeps formerly used processes in memory as long as possible (to make loading them again faster) since unused memory does no good. To get a real estimate of your free memory, add the numbers listed by "buffers" and "cached" to your reported "free" memory. Also, a better way to see this is to enter "free -m" in a terminal. This will actually show you the free memory +/- buffers and cache. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woolsherpahat
Guru
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 347
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I dunno why your computer seems slow, generally it's a loopback or DMA related issue.
_________________
The Real OTW
"Blue skies and high fives" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boroshan
l33t
Joined: 16 Apr 2003
Posts: 730
Location: upside down
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:11 pm Post subject: well... |
|
|
| 10k1 wrote: | | Okay, reiserfs should be pretty fast. |
For a 2.4 kernel, certainly. For a 2.6, possibly not.
There were some hefty issues with Reiser3 and kernel latency a while back. I'm not sure if they've been resolved yet - I migrated to R4 and thence to XFS which seems to perfom fine. Sadly, my GF is still on reiserfs and I don't have the unused space to create a new system. Ah well, drives are cheap, I suppose...
Of course, it may have all been sorted out by now, since this was around July 2004, but it could explain some of your peformance shortfall.
_________________
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
