Yes, I've heard people claim that using the preemptive scheduler patch on 2.4 it "feels" faster. but results seem anecdotal. Anyone here try that patch? My guess would be that total CPU throughput decreases, but interactive feeling increases, just what you want on workstation, but not on most servers. And i wouldn't try expermental patches on my servers :) On Fri, 9 May 2003 twg3@attbi.com wrote:

Some of this may also be related to the OS scheduler and VM configuration of the kernel - both of which have been improved in the new 2.5/2.6 kernel. The new shceduler is preemptive and does a better job of giving interactive processes a higher priority which makes the box "feel" faster. It is because of this feel, that I actually run a 2.2 kernel on my desktop/workstation since it feels faster than a 2.4 kernel (but does not support as much hardware which I can run 2.5 for if I need to).

...

I've notice that when going from redhat 7.x to 8 or 9 you need a minimum of 256M RAM. with 128M and running gnome there is way too much swap space in use.

Gnome and KDE are very bulky GUI's.. twm or blackbox are the slimest and fastest. A friend of mine runs gentoo linux and it seems very fast compared to redhat on the same box.

type the "free" command at the prompt and see your memory usage also "ps aumx" to see process memory usage.

I would reccomend spending the roughly $40 to get a 256M upgrade for your box. More RAM almost always helps. The os can keep more things in memory and give you a faster response. I use 512M myself.

hope this helps

On Fri, 9 May 2003, Hemstreet, Jeffrey L (Jeffrey) wrote:

...

I have a general question about Linux performance...

I am running Redhat 8.0 on a Dell 400MHz, 128MB system (OptiPlex) with an 8MB ATI Rage Pro Video card. I have a fairly basic workstation installation, with SSHd, ftpd, telnetd, apached, and a couple other services running. Gnome seems to take forever to open windows/applications. It can be on the order of 10 seconds to a minute for some applications to come up. (Mozilla is one of the worst, even to just bring up a local file as the home page for the browser)

Is Gnome just a very slow GUI, or is there something that I can do to speed up my system??

I know of several (5-6) people who have installed RedHat 7.2...8.0 on Dell and Sony systems (all CPU are 866MHz+) with Gnome or KDE and the performance has been very slow in the GUI. Even with a higher end 1.5GHz CPU/512MB RAM system.

Is there a Linux distribution that has a standard GUI that is very responsive? Is Redhat just too bulky to run quickly, or do I need to download a better GUI for Redhat?

With Windows2000, this system was very responsive, and the other people I know about are running XP, which is so much faster that they run XP most of the time now.

Thanks, jeff

--

¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø Karl Hiramoto Work: 978-425-2090 ext 25 Cell: 508-517-4819 Personal web page: http://karl.hiramoto.org/ Freedom: http://www.technojihad.com/ Zoop Productions: http://www.zoop.org/ KTEQ Rapid City: http://www.kteq.org/ AOL IM ID = KarlH420 Yahoo_IM = karl_hiramoto ¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø

The hardest thing is to disguise your feelings when you put a lot of relatives on the train for home.

_______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug@mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

_______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug@mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

-- ¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø Karl Hiramoto Work: 978-425-2090 ext 25 Cell: 508-517-4819 Personal web page: http://karl.hiramoto.org/ Freedom: http://www.technojihad.com/ Zoop Productions: http://www.zoop.org/ KTEQ Rapid City: http://www.kteq.org/ AOL IM ID = KarlH420 Yahoo_IM = karl_hiramoto ¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø The hardest thing is to disguise your feelings when you put a lot of relatives on the train for home.