[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Interactive Usage of 2.6.0.test1 worse than 2.4.21

    Peter Chubb wrote:

    >>>>>>"Andrew" == Andrew Morton <> writes:
    >Andrew> Martin Konold <> wrote:
    >>>when using 2.6.0.test1 on a high end laptop (P-IV 2.2 GHz, 1GB RAM)
    >>>I notice very significant slowdown in interactive usage compared to
    >>>The difference is most easily seen when switching folders in
    >>>kmail. While 2.4.21 is instantaneous 2.6.0.test1 shows the clock
    >>>for about 2-3 seconds.
    >I see the same problem, and I'm using XFS. Booting with
    >elevator=deadline fixed it for me. The anticipatory scheduler hurts
    >if you have a disc optimised for low power consumption, not speed.

    I don't think this generalisation is really fair. All hard disks
    have the same basic properties which AS exploits. There seems to
    be something going wrong though.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.020 / U:3.540 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site