Re: want to speed up laptop
Nice guided information. Nearly hit all points on my laptop, ext3 plus journal But I'm not good at tuning the file system. Never touch or change it since created the partition and got the box installed. There's too much valuable data on it. I'll keep this as my plan and will exercise it if the cost of data and time is allowable. Thanks. M. On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Tim Channon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael Yang wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 8:26 AM, jeffry s <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm using xfce4 now. It seems to me it's also getting slower (been using > for > > a long time now), I'm wondering if there's any tools to analyze the > system > > performance? > > This might go down poorly with some people... Linux file systems *do* > degrade. No war please. > > There are several factors which combine to hurt overall disk > performance, CPU load, memory bandwidth, disk interface bandwidth and > the disk itself. As a result slight changes tend to be magnified in > effect. If swap goes on the multi-stream disk use is particularly nasty, > and write to disk is slower anyway. > > This is likely to go unnoticed on a fast system but laptops particularly > have disk poor performance, at root slow platter rotation speed and > small diameter. This is basic physics, like for like bit density the bit > rate is lower than physically larger disks. > > There is no ideal file system, but where there are particular problems > consider alternatives to ext3. > > Assuming the laptop is reliable, free from system crashes. > > Almost by definition a laptop has an inbuilt UPS and therefore power > outages should never cause uncontrolled stoppage. > > Therefore a non journalled filing system is fairly painless and it might > be practical to try one to see how much effect it has. > > A very obvious experiment is kill the journal, turning ext3 into ext2, > literally ext3 is ext2 plus an extra layer. This is a two way possible > operation without touching the basic disk data, with ext2 being > upgradable back to ext3 if wanted. (clue in the -j option > http://linux.die.net/man/8/tune2fs) > > I have done this successfully on a laptop, so I know it is possible, > trivially easy, but... there was no critical data on the disk so if it > had gone wrong only time was lost. Only one way to discover your mileage. > > At least be prepared for handling a non-bootable system and how to get > out of it. Debian allows some disk operations during boot with the disk > mounted read only. > > With ext2 if the system is reset with a mounted disk it will trip a > system file check on boot and this is slow, possibly tripping a repair > and second boot. Apparently the data safety is the same as ext3, but > with the journalling, recovery does not need the detailed file system > check after a crash. (anyone here confirm this?) > > I could point at instructions but others on list are far more > knowledgeable. > > There are file system differences and default ext3 fits all has been > question some places. > Some numbers and comment, plenty more around the 'net > http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388 > > "The first reason is that 'ext3' performance is awesome when the > filesystem has just been created and loaded, but degrades very badly > over time..." > > There are graphs out there showing speed degrade with usage for various > file systems. > >
Re: want to speed up laptop
Michael Yang wrote: On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 8:26 AM, jeffry s <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm using xfce4 now. It seems to me it's also getting slower (been using for a long time now), I'm wondering if there's any tools to analyze the system performance? This might go down poorly with some people... Linux file systems *do* degrade. No war please. There are several factors which combine to hurt overall disk performance, CPU load, memory bandwidth, disk interface bandwidth and the disk itself. As a result slight changes tend to be magnified in effect. If swap goes on the multi-stream disk use is particularly nasty, and write to disk is slower anyway. This is likely to go unnoticed on a fast system but laptops particularly have disk poor performance, at root slow platter rotation speed and small diameter. This is basic physics, like for like bit density the bit rate is lower than physically larger disks. There is no ideal file system, but where there are particular problems consider alternatives to ext3. Assuming the laptop is reliable, free from system crashes. Almost by definition a laptop has an inbuilt UPS and therefore power outages should never cause uncontrolled stoppage. Therefore a non journalled filing system is fairly painless and it might be practical to try one to see how much effect it has. A very obvious experiment is kill the journal, turning ext3 into ext2, literally ext3 is ext2 plus an extra layer. This is a two way possible operation without touching the basic disk data, with ext2 being upgradable back to ext3 if wanted. (clue in the -j option http://linux.die.net/man/8/tune2fs) I have done this successfully on a laptop, so I know it is possible, trivially easy, but... there was no critical data on the disk so if it had gone wrong only time was lost. Only one way to discover your mileage. At least be prepared for handling a non-bootable system and how to get out of it. Debian allows some disk operations during boot with the disk mounted read only. With ext2 if the system is reset with a mounted disk it will trip a system file check on boot and this is slow, possibly tripping a repair and second boot. Apparently the data safety is the same as ext3, but with the journalling, recovery does not need the detailed file system check after a crash. (anyone here confirm this?) I could point at instructions but others on list are far more knowledgeable. There are file system differences and default ext3 fits all has been question some places. Some numbers and comment, plenty more around the 'net http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388 "The first reason is that 'ext3' performance is awesome when the filesystem has just been created and loaded, but degrades very badly over time..." There are graphs out there showing speed degrade with usage for various file systems. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: want to speed up laptop
Douglas A. Tutty wrote: xfce used to use gtk1. It now uses gtk2 which is far more bloated which makes it slower. It also uses more memory... Icewm does not, and OpenBox may not either. You could try those. currently i use FVWM-Crystal as my default desktop environment with Fluxbox as my "secondary". i _really_ like FVWM-Crystal now after i finally took the time to set it up. it gives me just enough 'eye candy' without the bloat. other than the quake terminal i use xfce4-terminal for most everything. largely for the configuration options and especially since it won't annoy me when i press 'F10' while using midnight commander. -- Arrant Drivel - really, it's just trash... http://www.arrantdrivel.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: want to speed up laptop
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 10:46:44PM -0400, Michael Yang wrote: > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 8:26 AM, jeffry s <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Rich Healey > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Chris Bannister wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 09:12:06AM -0500, Preston Boyington > > > > wrote: > > > >> Chris Bannister wrote: > > > >>> Where are your bottlenecks? > > > >> currently my two biggest bottlenecks are with the networking > > > >> and the MTA. i installed "ifplugd" and set a faster timeout > > > >> for the network and that has helped. i don't really "need" a > > > >> MTA for my laptop and will be looking for some alternative. > > > >> have thought about just removing Exim and dealing with whatever > > > >> dependency issues arise. i can always just look at the log > > > >> files for info if i need to. > > > > > > > > I think that is a DNS lookup issue. > > > > > > > use xfce4 instead of gnome or kde. it help a lot. my laptop is old > > via c3 processor. run more happy with xfce. using gnome will take > > some time to open window especially nautilus use so much resource. > > > > I'm using xfce4 now. It seems to me it's also getting slower (been > using for a long time now), I'm wondering if there's any tools to > analyze the system performance? xfce used to use gtk1. It now uses gtk2 which is far more bloated which makes it slower. It also uses more memory. Try running top in an xterm and see what's happening. Look especially for wait% which refers to waiting for I/O and check swap. On my old boxes, most things hit swap. Icewm does not, and OpenBox may not either. You could try those. Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: want to speed up laptop
> I'm using xfce4 now. It seems to me it's also getting slower (been using > for a long time now), I'm wondering if there's any tools to analyze the > system performance? > > Thanks. > well, i wonder why GTK2 is slow. i never try KDE. but compare GTK and QTK which one more suitable for old computer? i will try openbox and icewm. i just wondering, since most of the GNOME program written in GTK. it still use GTK when i run the program. so, not much points to change to IceWM or OpenBOX.
Re: want to speed up laptop
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 8:26 AM, jeffry s <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Rich Healey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Chris Bannister wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 09:12:06AM -0500, Preston Boyington wrote: > > >> Chris Bannister wrote: > > >> > > >>> Where are your bottlenecks? > > >> currently my two biggest bottlenecks are with the networking and the > > >> MTA. i installed "ifplugd" and set a faster timeout for the network > > and > > >> that has helped. i don't really "need" a MTA for my laptop and will > > be > > >> looking for some alternative. have thought about just removing Exim > > and > > >> dealing with whatever dependency issues arise. i can always just > > look > > >> at the log files for info if i need to. > > > > > > I think that is a DNS lookup issue. > > > > > >>> I altered the link from /bin/sh to point to /bin/dash instead of > > >>> /bin/bash but I'm not sure if I got a big improvement. It seems > > >>> reasonably fast though. :-) > > >> i have been using zsh recently and it has worked pretty well so far. > > > > > > No, the shell *you* use is determined by the line in /etc/passwd. What > > I > > > meant was the shell used to execute the initscripts. > > > > > > What does: > > > > > > # ls -al /bin/sh > > > > > > produce? > > > > > > If it comes back as pointing to /bin/bash then try pointing /bin/sh to > > > /bin/dash and see if there is any improvement. > > > > > > use xfce4 instead of gnome or kde. it help a lot. my laptop is old > via c3 processor. run more happy with xfce. using gnome will take some > time > to open window especially nautilus use so much resource. > I'm using xfce4 now. It seems to me it's also getting slower (been using for a long time now), I'm wondering if there's any tools to analyze the system performance? Thanks.
Re: want to speed up laptop
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 08:26:13PM +0800, jeffry s wrote: > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Rich Healey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Chris Bannister wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 09:12:06AM -0500, Preston Boyington wrote: > use xfce4 instead of gnome or kde. it help a lot. my laptop is old > via c3 processor. run more happy with xfce. using gnome will take some time > to open window especially nautilus use so much resource. Since Xfce now uses GTK2, its slower. You could get away from it entirely and try either OpenBox or Icewm. Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: want to speed up laptop
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Rich Healey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 09:12:06AM -0500, Preston Boyington wrote: > >> Chris Bannister wrote: > >> > >>> Where are your bottlenecks? > >> currently my two biggest bottlenecks are with the networking and the > >> MTA. i installed "ifplugd" and set a faster timeout for the network > and > >> that has helped. i don't really "need" a MTA for my laptop and will be > >> looking for some alternative. have thought about just removing Exim > and > >> dealing with whatever dependency issues arise. i can always just look > >> at the log files for info if i need to. > > > > I think that is a DNS lookup issue. > > > >>> I altered the link from /bin/sh to point to /bin/dash instead of > >>> /bin/bash but I'm not sure if I got a big improvement. It seems > >>> reasonably fast though. :-) > >> i have been using zsh recently and it has worked pretty well so far. > > > > No, the shell *you* use is determined by the line in /etc/passwd. What I > > meant was the shell used to execute the initscripts. > > > > What does: > > > > # ls -al /bin/sh > > > > produce? > > > > If it comes back as pointing to /bin/bash then try pointing /bin/sh to > > /bin/dash and see if there is any improvement. > > use xfce4 instead of gnome or kde. it help a lot. my laptop is old via c3 processor. run more happy with xfce. using gnome will take some time to open window especially nautilus use so much resource.
Re: want to speed up laptop
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris Bannister wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 09:12:06AM -0500, Preston Boyington wrote: >> Chris Bannister wrote: >> >>> Where are your bottlenecks? >> currently my two biggest bottlenecks are with the networking and the >> MTA. i installed "ifplugd" and set a faster timeout for the network and >> that has helped. i don't really "need" a MTA for my laptop and will be >> looking for some alternative. have thought about just removing Exim and >> dealing with whatever dependency issues arise. i can always just look >> at the log files for info if i need to. > > I think that is a DNS lookup issue. > >>> I altered the link from /bin/sh to point to /bin/dash instead of >>> /bin/bash but I'm not sure if I got a big improvement. It seems >>> reasonably fast though. :-) >> i have been using zsh recently and it has worked pretty well so far. > > No, the shell *you* use is determined by the line in /etc/passwd. What I > meant was the shell used to execute the initscripts. > > What does: > > # ls -al /bin/sh > > produce? > > If it comes back as pointing to /bin/bash then try pointing /bin/sh to > /bin/dash and see if there is any improvement. > installing dash first would probably be an idea. I could be wrong, but i don't believe it comes in a stock install. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH7vbsLeTfO4yBSAcRApcsAKCnfURHOBRpUYE8ArCC840IoG/KjACgjxis E2rl7Oeb3T9uvsZ8Auc0zV0= =isQc -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
