i was also had slow system with rh8 and kde that came with it. then i
tried windowmaker also packed with rh8. i must say performace is better
but you don't have that fancy toolbar and menu - i didn't use it anyway.
plus WM loads 10 times faster than kde...
regards, himba
Polar Humenn wrote:
about disk reading perfs... i belive that your current system load
effects the numbers you get with /hdparm -t /dev/hda/.
on duron 1G, 512mb ram, 40 gig ide maxtor 7200rpm, dma on this poor, i think
/(under -> /load average: 1.64, 1.51, 1.29/ )
hdparm -t /dev/hda/
Timing buffered disk reads: 64
Polar Humenn wrote:
I updated from Slackware, because updating it was a pain. But now that I
have this RedHat 8.0 thing installed, my system is slower than a
two-legged tortoise. I've got a dual-pentium 800Mz with 512MB RAM. The KDE
used to fly under Slack. Now, what's happened?
Which apps are slo
Polar Humenn,
On Tuesday March 04, 2003 02:22, Polar Humenn wrote:
> H Somebody told me that all the packages besides the kernel are
> compiled for the 386, not the 686, and this might have a significant
> impact. However, when I ran with Slackware, I think all their binary
> packages are comp
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 02:22:07PM -0500, Polar Humenn wrote:
>
> H Somebody told me that all the packages besides the kernel are
> compiled for the 386, not the 686, and this might have a significant
> impact.
The first part is right - most packages are compiled for a 386. The 2nd
part is
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 09:51:02AM -0500, Polar Humenn wrote:
>
> I updated from Slackware, because updating it was a pain. But now that I
> have this RedHat 8.0 thing installed, my system is slower than a
> two-legged tortoise. I've got a dual-pentium 800Mz with 512MB RAM. The KDE
> used to fly u
El Mar 04 Mar 2003 13:22, Polar Humenn escribió:
> H Somebody told me that all the packages besides the kernel are
> compiled for the 386, not the 686, and this might have a significant
> impact. However, when I ran with Slackware, I think all their binary
> packages are compiled for the 386 as
A. Compiled for 386, 686, whatever, makes no difference, thats no reason for it
to be intolerably slow.
B. AGP is Advanced Graphics Port or some such acronym, it only has to do
with video card and ram used for that AGP port.
C. Redhat 8.0 is not a "slower dog" in my expierence. On my wo
H Somebody told me that all the packages besides the kernel are
compiled for the 386, not the 686, and this might have a significant
impact. However, when I ran with Slackware, I think all their binary
packages are compiled for the 386 as well, and I didn't notice the
slowness.
I've gone into
Polar,
Given your results below, I decided to test my own. I'm finding much
poorer results (So, count your blessings). My laptop results are:
# ./hdparm -acd /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
IO_support = 0 (default 16-bit)
using_dma= 1 (on)
readahead= 8 (on)
# ./hdparm -t /dev/hda
/dev/hda:
T
Polar Humenn,
On Tuesday March 04, 2003 11:49, Polar Humenn wrote:
> > Does "free" show that all the memory is recognized properly?
>
> total used free sharedbuffers cached
> Mem:254556 222996 31560 0 39064 45084
> -/+ buffers
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Brian Ashe wrote:
> Is it possible that DMA is not enabled for the hard disk(s)?
> That has been the most common thing I've seen cause speed problems.
>
> What does "hdparm -acd /dev/hda" return?
I've got 1 10GB SCSI for the system, and 2 30GB in a Software RAID 1
But I do h
Polar Humenn,
On Tuesday March 04, 2003 09:51, Polar Humenn wrote:
> I updated from Slackware, because updating it was a pain. But now that I
> have this RedHat 8.0 thing installed, my system is slower than a
> two-legged tortoise. I've got a dual-pentium 800Mz with 512MB RAM. The KDE
> used to fl
I updated from Slackware, because updating it was a pain. But now that I
have this RedHat 8.0 thing installed, my system is slower than a
two-legged tortoise. I've got a dual-pentium 800Mz with 512MB RAM. The KDE
used to fly under Slack. Now, what's happened?
I also installed RH 8.0 on my Laptop,
14 matches
Mail list logo
