Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Apr 1999 07:37:27 +1200 | From | Chris Wedgwood <> | Subject | Re: 2.2.x kernels and low memory levels |
| |
On Mon, Apr 26, 1999 at 07:42:45PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> It depends very much on the workload, but 2.2 tends to be faster > for most things. Be careful _which_ 2.2 you use, as some of the > earlier ones did have problems in certain situations.
Under what circumstances is 2.0.x faster than 2.2.x? using 2.2.6-ac2 I don't see this, although I've not tested thoroughly[1] with low-memory (although initial indications make me think 2.2.x is no worse here).
-cw
[1] I'm using the `see how many people I can kill' quake2 test
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |