On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 05:53:48PM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:50:32AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 05:27:56PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > > You can reproduce the performance fall-off by using a slow network
> > > connection,
> >
> > I
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:50:32AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 05:27:56PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > You can reproduce the performance fall-off by using a slow network
> > connection,
>
> I suppose I could, if I had a slow connection.
> Simulating one (from
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:50:32AM -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 05:27:56PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > You can reproduce the performance fall-off by using a slow network
> > connection,
>
> I suppose I could, if I had a slow connection.
> Simulating one (from
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 05:27:56PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> You can reproduce the performance fall-off by using a slow network connection,
I suppose I could, if I had a slow connection.
Simulating one (from previous experience) hasn't been reliable :-(
--
Thomas E. Dickey
You can reproduce the performance fall-off by using a slow network connection,
e.g. via IPsec and DSL and public Internet to a remote site. The "small numbers"
case was taken using a local network connection from one Linux PC to another.
Ping shows a round-trip time of 0.3ms for this local
Sorry for the delay.
The rsnapshot file is just
% wc -c /var/log/rsnapshot
433435 /var/log/rsnapshot
See attachment. The important part seems to be the very long lines in the
text file. "time zcat rsnapshot.log.gz" gave me for a local network
connection
253x50:
real
On 2020-03-24 19:23 -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 01:15:40PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>> Package: xterm
>> Version: 353-1
>>
>> xterm -g 256x50 has a much worse "scroll performance" than xterm -g 255x50,
>> esp if there are very long lines and its a slow network
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 01:15:40PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Package: xterm
> Version: 353-1
>
> xterm -g 256x50 has a much worse "scroll performance" than xterm -g 255x50,
> esp if there are very long lines and its a slow network connection. Sample:
>
> xterm -g 255x50:
> # time cat
Package: xterm
Version: 353-1
xterm -g 256x50 has a much worse "scroll performance" than xterm -g 255x50,
esp if there are very long lines and its a slow network connection. Sample:
xterm -g 255x50:
# time cat /var/log/rsnapshot.log
:
:
real0m0.041s
user0m0.000s
sys 0m0.006s
9 matches
Mail list logo
