[picking a random message to reply to] On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 03:12:50PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 11:40 AM -0700 10/29/02, Raymond Kohler wrote: > >1) How is the speed compared to stable? I remember it being just > >too slow some months ago and was wondering how it was improving. > > Seems OK to me. Note that it's using a newer version of gcc, and > that definitely takes longer than the 2.92 version on -stable. So, > if you do a lot of compiling then -current will definitely be slower > for you.
I am experiencing a really noticable slower startup time on my very recent
-CURRENT laptop for almost all programs. The problem seems to be in getting
info in the cache, because it disappears when I start the same program again.
It is even noticable when doing a simple 'ls -l' in an uncached directory (ie
boot the laptop, cd tmp/test && ls -l), but larger things, like starting X,
take roughly two or three times as long as on -STABLE.
Note that this is all 'gut feeling'. I do not (yet) have hard numbers, but I'm
willing to provide some info if people tell me how (is a simple 'time'
sufficient? in what environment?).
I have INVARIANTS & WITNESS disabled in -CURRENT, and an /etc/mallof.conf
pointing to 'aj'.
unames:
FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #1: Tue Oct 29 12:38:07 GMT 2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/local/src/CURRENT/src/sys/POUNCE
FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE #0: Thu Aug 29 13:20:36 CEST 2002
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/local/src/obj/local/src/STABLE/src/sys/NBWIN209
The systems hostname was changed between Aug & Oct, but it's the
same laptop, a P3-800 w/256MB memory.
Thoughts?
--Stijn
--
"Linux has many different distributions, meaning that you can probably find
one that is exactly what you want (I even found one that looked like a Unix
system)."
-- Mike Meyer, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
msg45626/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
