Joeb, Con posted his response on this list- I'm sure you saw it. Next time I recompile, I think I'll set mine higher just to see if it helps. I'd really be interested in learning about RedHat's thinking on this subject- can you point us to where you learned about this? I'm all for doing anything to increase performance.
Thanks, Robert C. On Friday 27 June 2003 07:37, Joeb wrote: > Even though you meant to send this off list, would you mind posting the > response (or even the thread)? I'm very interested in this as it is my > understanding that it is one of main ways that Redhat uses to increase > performance for desktop use. > > Joeb > > > On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 20:32:48 -0400 > > Robert Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry- this was meant to be sent to directly Con Kolivas- Apparently, I > > messed up and it somehow appeared on the expert list, addressed to > > myself- still can't figure that one out. > > > > Robert C. > > > > On Thursday 26 June 2003 19:51, you wrote: > > > Con, > > > Tried the new june23 full patch, but couldn't get past make modules. I > > > then edited my .config file some, and did the base patch, plus the > > > performance patches, and supermount, all individually, and that worked > > > out great. Must have been some conflict caused by the old .config. > > > > > > Anyway, my question is about setting the Variable Hz- do you mean when > > > I do xconfig, I should change the setting in General setup to a higher > > > value, and see if performance is improved? Here's my present value, > > > that apparently is the default. Or, is that what we're even talking > > > about? I'm not sure I understand this, due to lack of knowledge. > > > > > > # General setup > > > # > > > CONFIG_HZ=200 > > > > > > On your webpage I read: > > > > > > Is 1000Hz more overhead than 100Hz? Yes definitely, but not a great > > > deal. If you change the Hz, use a multiple of 100. There really is no > > > point going above 1000 Hz. > > > > > > I assume this means that if I'm correct and you are referring to that > > > line in xconfig, I can experiment. Am I also correct in that I need > > > your patch in order to experiment with this value? Or, am I totally > > > misunderstanding all of the above, and the ck3 patches already set some > > > other value to 1000Mhz that I'm confusing with the line in the kernel > > > .config file? > > > > > > Thanks for the great patches- I'm now using 2.4.21 with CK patches > > > exclusively on MDK 9.1- nothing works better for my desktop box. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Robert Crawford
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
