[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4
Hmm, it seems that I didnt realize I had to cc that to the list, because I belive this is something that should be on the list.

Anyhow, exactly how much tweeking did you do, and isnt the ac tree suppost to be unstable?

On 13-Oct-2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Now as of the tuning problem, that seems to be deep magic to me. How would =
> > one tune 2.4 for a p133 with 16 megs of memory? Or should I just give up an=
> > d try to tune 2.2?
> I've been running 2.4.12-ac1 happily on both 20Mb and 32Mb boxes. The
> performance of the kernel has been good. Indeed the tuning work I had to do
> on the 20Mb PC110 has been userspace.
> Alan

Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland ||
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:08    [W:0.022 / U:0.396 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site