Re: Pathetic Performance
Sure, Blackbox is nice but it keeps this bar under in the desktop, even when I switch xawtv to full screen mode (that is TV for you folks who don't know). And it doesn't have my locally installed apps in its menu. With xterm I have everything in every screen. -- Hans At 12:46 PM 1/27/00 -0500, Paul Kallstrom wrote: >For tight ram systems, I use blackbox. It's very clean and FAST. > >- Original Message - >From: "aphro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Hans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: "Debian user mailinglist" ; list not shown: ;> >Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 12:04 PM >Subject: Re: Pathetic Performance > > >> after using afterstep for so long twm just feels bland..id use it if i >> needed it(was low on memory) but if i had a choice..ack! i cant see my >> self using it cept in last resort..i havent used it much so im sure i >> havent gotten to appreciate it's benefits(if it has any other then memory >> conservation :) ) i find it hard to live without afterstep's >> desktop/window management though. nothing else i've tried >> (gnome/E/kde/windowmaker to some extent) compares.. >> >> nate >> >> On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Hans wrote: >> >> hansfo >>and i'd suggest going to fvwm (or even twm *shiver*) to reduce >memory >> hansfo >>usage even further. >> hansfo > >> hansfo >Why would you shiver over twm. I dumped all my wm's and now run >twm >> hansfo >exclusively and I'm happier than ever :^) -- Hans >> hansfo > >> hansfo > >> hansfo >-- >> hansfo >Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe >[EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null >> hansfo > >> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- >>Vice President Network Operations http://www.firetrail.com/ >> Firetrail Internet Services Limited http://www.aphroland.org/ >>Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/ >> Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/ >> Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/ >> -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- >> 8:58am up 160 days, 21:05, 1 user, load average: 1.02, 1.05, 1.07 >> >> >> -- >> Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < >/dev/null > > >-- >Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > >
Re: Pathetic Performance
For tight ram systems, I use blackbox. It's very clean and FAST. - Original Message - From: "aphro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Debian user mailinglist" ; Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 12:04 PM Subject: Re: Pathetic Performance > after using afterstep for so long twm just feels bland..id use it if i > needed it(was low on memory) but if i had a choice..ack! i cant see my > self using it cept in last resort..i havent used it much so im sure i > havent gotten to appreciate it's benefits(if it has any other then memory > conservation :) ) i find it hard to live without afterstep's > desktop/window management though. nothing else i've tried > (gnome/E/kde/windowmaker to some extent) compares.. > > nate > > On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Hans wrote: > > hansfo >>and i'd suggest going to fvwm (or even twm *shiver*) to reduce memory > hansfo >>usage even further. > hansfo > > hansfo >Why would you shiver over twm. I dumped all my wm's and now run twm > hansfo >exclusively and I'm happier than ever :^) -- Hans > hansfo > > hansfo > > hansfo >-- > hansfo >Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > hansfo > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- >Vice President Network Operations http://www.firetrail.com/ > Firetrail Internet Services Limited http://www.aphroland.org/ >Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/ > Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/ > Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/ > -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- > 8:58am up 160 days, 21:05, 1 user, load average: 1.02, 1.05, 1.07 > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
Re: Pathetic Performance
after using afterstep for so long twm just feels bland..id use it if i needed it(was low on memory) but if i had a choice..ack! i cant see my self using it cept in last resort..i havent used it much so im sure i havent gotten to appreciate it's benefits(if it has any other then memory conservation :) ) i find it hard to live without afterstep's desktop/window management though. nothing else i've tried (gnome/E/kde/windowmaker to some extent) compares.. nate On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Hans wrote: hansfo >>and i'd suggest going to fvwm (or even twm *shiver*) to reduce memory hansfo >>usage even further. hansfo > hansfo >Why would you shiver over twm. I dumped all my wm's and now run twm hansfo >exclusively and I'm happier than ever :^) -- Hans hansfo > hansfo > hansfo >-- hansfo >Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null hansfo > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- Vice President Network Operations http://www.firetrail.com/ Firetrail Internet Services Limited http://www.aphroland.org/ Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/ Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/ Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/ -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- 8:58am up 160 days, 21:05, 1 user, load average: 1.02, 1.05, 1.07
Re: Pathetic Performance
>and i'd suggest going to fvwm (or even twm *shiver*) to reduce memory >usage even further. Why would you shiver over twm. I dumped all my wm's and now run twm exclusively and I'm happier than ever :^) -- Hans
Re: Pathetic Performance
>The 486-33 (Carol) has 42mb ram and I was wrong about >the 486- >100 (Alice) machine it's only got 20mb of ram. Alice >has a Cirrus >Logic GD54xx series PCI card with 1mb ram. Both >systems use >the svga xserver. As far as swap space Carol has a >swap partition >but Alice has a swap file on the single partition, >Corel didn't ask at >install. Top tells me I'm 26M into Alice's swap file >as I write this. > >As for the desktop I'm running WindowMaker without >Gnome on >Alice and the 33Mhz Carol runs FVWM2. Did you upgrade the -100 system to the faster cpu, or did it come that way? I once had a 486dx-33 which I upgraded to a dx100 and (this was in the windows days) norton showed NO increase in speed. I CAREFULLY went into the bios and changed the cache settings to use fewer cycles. VIOLA! I was now getting full speed from the cpu. You might look at the bogo mips ouptput and compare to what similar 486dx100's get (see the bogomips howto). The bogo mips rating is generally useless, but it CAN sometimes show a cpu not firing on all cylinders. (I caught a 486 with the turbo switch in the wrong setting that way. Then again if LILO is slow it means the same thing.) And yes I agree with the comments on memory. Look at /proc/meminfo when the system is loaded and see how much of your memory and swap space are being used. If swap is maxing out, you DO have a problem. = Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: Pathetic Performance
--- "W. Keegan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've since recompiled the kernel and while it's much smaller and I > "think" its faster then before it's not at par with the 486-33. I told you :) > The 486-33 (Carol) has 42mb ram and I was wrong about the 486- > 100 (Alice) machine it's only got 20mb of ram. That's a problem. RAM is essential for good performance. Give it a bit more. > As far as swap space Carol has a swap partition but Alice has a swap file on > the single partition, Corel didn't ask at install. So change it manually. A swap file is worse than a dedicated partition. > Top tells me I'm 26M into Alice's swap file as I write this. 8-O no wonder it's slow... > As for the desktop I'm running WindowMaker without Gnome on Alice and the > 33Mhz Carol runs FVWM2. I dumped WindowMaker for Sawmill on my PPC box with 48M RAM because it was too slow... The short story is: If your system hits swap heavily, it's _dead_. Michel = "Software is like sex; it's better when it's free" -- Linus Torvalds "If you continue running Windows, your system may become unstable." -- Windows 95 BSOD __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: Pathetic Performance
add more ram.. in cases with 64MB and below, swapping to disk more then you have available memory really causes severe performance problems esp in a GUI enviornment regaurdless of OS. and/or get another physical hdd to swap to. or, run it off of NFS and run the swap from local disk. with a decent NIC you may see comparable results over NFS as you do from one of those reallly slow IDE drives, but with the added benefit that the hdd is used only for swap. and i'd suggest going to fvwm (or even twm *shiver*) to reduce memory usage even further. nate On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, W. Keegan wrote: billk > billk >> I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, >1G hd, billk >> networked with three other PCs. This workstation is 5X slower then a billk >> 486-33 running RH 5.0 acting as a gateway, Samba server, mail, etc. I billk >> welcome any suggestions towards finding what must be a gross billk >> misconfiguration. billk > billk >I've since recompiled the kernel and while it's much smaller and I billk >"think" its faster then before it's not at par with the 486-33. billk > billk >The 486-33 (Carol) has 42mb ram and I was wrong about the 486- billk >100 (Alice) machine it's only got 20mb of ram. Alice has a Cirrus billk >Logic GD54xx series PCI card with 1mb ram. Both systems use billk >the svga xserver. As far as swap space Carol has a swap partition billk >but Alice has a swap file on the single partition, Corel didn't ask at billk >install. Top tells me I'm 26M into Alice's swap file as I write this. billk > billk >As for the desktop I'm running WindowMaker without Gnome on billk >Alice and the 33Mhz Carol runs FVWM2. billk > billk >Your advice is appreciated and any other suggestions are welcome. billk > billk >bill billk > billk >PS Hawk the bios has the cache enabled and set to write-back. billk > billk > billk > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- Vice President Network Operations http://www.firetrail.com/ Firetrail Internet Services Limited http://www.aphroland.org/ Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/ Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/ Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/ -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- 9:40am up 159 days, 21:47, 1 user, load average: 1.08, 1.04, 1.03
Re: Pathetic Performance
> I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, >1G hd, > networked with three other PCs. This workstation is 5X slower then a > 486-33 running RH 5.0 acting as a gateway, Samba server, mail, etc. I > welcome any suggestions towards finding what must be a gross > misconfiguration. I've since recompiled the kernel and while it's much smaller and I "think" its faster then before it's not at par with the 486-33. The 486-33 (Carol) has 42mb ram and I was wrong about the 486- 100 (Alice) machine it's only got 20mb of ram. Alice has a Cirrus Logic GD54xx series PCI card with 1mb ram. Both systems use the svga xserver. As far as swap space Carol has a swap partition but Alice has a swap file on the single partition, Corel didn't ask at install. Top tells me I'm 26M into Alice's swap file as I write this. As for the desktop I'm running WindowMaker without Gnome on Alice and the 33Mhz Carol runs FVWM2. Your advice is appreciated and any other suggestions are welcome. bill PS Hawk the bios has the cache enabled and set to write-back.
Re: Pathetic Performance
also make sure that you caches are turned on in the bios. I ran into sluggish performance a couple of months ago after a bios reset, and this was it. Of course, this gateway p120 is still about the same speed as my 486/50 thinkpad with 4m less memory (ok, except when rendering postscript or latex), but at least that rought it back to the same speed :) --
Re: Pathetic Performance
On 25 Jan 2000, John Hasler wrote: > Jesse writes: > > Sure, it's not a K6, and more ram would help, but this should be > > sufficient for a comfortably fast non-graphics-intensive workstation. > > He's running Corel, which means KDE with bells on. With only 24M he'll be > into swap before he touches the mouse. > > Dump KDE and install a small window manager such as icewm (or learn to use > the command line). A little harsh, but probably true. I'm running KDE 1.1.2 on Debain 2.1 with 36M RAM, and end up using ~300k of swap if checked right after a startup. It appears to cruise at ~14M(?). If you slim down the kernel, link ash to /bin/sh, and use mingetty instead of getty, it will probably work ok for non-graphics intensive stuff. - Bruce
Re: Pathetic Performance
Jesse writes: > Sure, it's not a K6, and more ram would help, but this should be > sufficient for a comfortably fast non-graphics-intensive workstation. He's running Corel, which means KDE with bells on. With only 24M he'll be into swap before he touches the mouse. Dump KDE and install a small window manager such as icewm (or learn to use the command line). -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, Wisconsin
Re: Pathetic Performance
--- Jesse Jacobsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OTOH, Netscape is always sluggish, as is Enlightenment and some others. It's kinda fast on my Athlon/500 :) Michel = "Software is like sex; it's better when it's free" -- Linus Torvalds "If you continue running Windows, your system may become unstable." -- Windows 95 BSOD __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: Pathetic Performance
On 01/25/00, Michel Dänzer addressed "Re: Pathetic Performance": > --- Bill Keegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, > > This is very little RAM. However, I ran a machine with exactly the same specs for a number of years, using bo and hamm, having no speed problems at all. Sure, it's not a K6, and more ram would help, but this should be sufficient for a comfortably fast non-graphics-intensive workstation. OTOH, Netscape is always sluggish, as is Enlightenment and some others. -- Jesse Jacobsen, Pastor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Grace Lutheran Church (ELS) http://www.jvlnet.com/~jjacobsen/ Madison, Wisconsin GnuPG public key ID: 2E3EBF13
Re: Pathetic Performance
what windowmanager are you using in corel? and in redhat? i highly reccomend AGAINST KDE on any 486 or any machine with less then 48MB ram. i bet much of hte problem is kde taking up all the memory and the machine has to swap to the end of helll to run any app :) nate On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Bill Keegan wrote: billk >I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, >1G hd, billk >networked with three other PCs. This workstation is 5X slower then a billk >486-33 running RH 5.0 acting as a gateway, Samba server, mail, etc. I billk >welcome any suggestions towards finding what must be a gross billk >misconfiguration. billk > billk >On the 486-100 every service not needed has been pulled from bootup, billk >Apache, Qmail, etc. Using windowmanager with Netscape 4.7 is painful and billk >literally 5 times slower in creating a new browser window or displaying billk >a new page the the 486-33. billk > billk >I will begin by rebuilding the kernel with i486 optimization but I find billk >it hard to believe that Pentium optimization could slow it down this billk >much. Again any other ideas? billk > billk >Bill billk > billk > billk >-- billk >Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null billk > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- Vice President Network Operations http://www.firetrail.com/ Firetrail Internet Services Limited http://www.aphroland.org/ Everett, WA 425-348-7336http://www.linuxpowered.net/ Powered By:http://comedy.aphroland.org/ Debian 2.1 Linux 2.0.36 SMPhttp://yahoo.aphroland.org/ -[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]-- 8:04am up 158 days, 20:10, 1 user, load average: 1.19, 1.14, 1.17
Re: Pathetic Performance
--- Bill Keegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, This is very little RAM. > >1G hd, networked with three other PCs. This workstation is 5X slower then a > 486-33 running RH 5.0 acting as a gateway, Samba server, mail, etc. How much does this one have? > On the 486-100 every service not needed has been pulled from bootup, > Apache, Qmail, etc. Using windowmanager with Netscape 4.7 is painful and > literally 5 times slower in creating a new browser window or displaying > a new page the the 486-33. What gfx cards do they have? Do you use an accelerated X server on both? A very important factor for system performance is also HD speed, swap space, ... > I will begin by rebuilding the kernel with i486 optimization but I find > it hard to believe that Pentium optimization could slow it down this > much. Again any other ideas? Don't bother. The kernels you're using are probably not especially optimized for anything above an 386. It really shouldn't matter that much. Michel = "Software is like sex; it's better when it's free" -- Linus Torvalds "If you continue running Windows, your system may become unstable." -- Windows 95 BSOD __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: Pathetic Performance
Bill, Corel have a marvellous installer - I can get my laptop to look great with it but it never even starts X with Debian. However, you do need to recompile the kernel immediately you decide to stick with Corel because it loads loads of irrelevenat stuff. Patrick
Pathetic Performance
I'm running Corel/Debian v1.0 on a AMD 486-100. 24mb ram, >1G hd, networked with three other PCs. This workstation is 5X slower then a 486-33 running RH 5.0 acting as a gateway, Samba server, mail, etc. I welcome any suggestions towards finding what must be a gross misconfiguration. On the 486-100 every service not needed has been pulled from bootup, Apache, Qmail, etc. Using windowmanager with Netscape 4.7 is painful and literally 5 times slower in creating a new browser window or displaying a new page the the 486-33. I will begin by rebuilding the kernel with i486 optimization but I find it hard to believe that Pentium optimization could slow it down this much. Again any other ideas? Bill
