On Wednesday 16 November 2005 01:45, David Masover wrote:
> I got sick of waiting for it and nuked the fsync call. All my kernels
> have a custom patch such that sys_fsync just returns true, no matter what.
Mhh.. would it be something like this?
--- buffer.c.old2005-11-16 02:36:46.129829
Craig Shelley wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 15:13 -0800, Avuton Olrich wrote:
>
>>It's funny that you mention vim. vim seems to be what _really_ makes
>>my reiser4 do the 'slowdown'. I call it harddrive thrashing cause
>>that's what my wife calls it when she hears it from 5 yards away :)
>>Right
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 15:13 -0800, Avuton Olrich wrote:
> It's funny that you mention vim. vim seems to be what _really_ makes
> my reiser4 do the 'slowdown'. I call it harddrive thrashing cause
> that's what my wife calls it when she hears it from 5 yards away :)
> Right before saving or saving/ex
Avuton Olrich wrote:
It's funny that you mention vim. vim seems to be what _really_ makes
my reiser4 do the 'slowdown'. I call it harddrive thrashing cause
that's what my wife calls it when she hears it from 5 yards away :)
Right before saving or saving/exiting it really does this thrashing,
Than
On 11/15/05, Andreas Rosander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well i do recon that I to have slow downs with vim or rather gvim and
> I have noticed it when im use gedit too.
> will try to downgrade too 2.6.12 and see if my box will rid of the slowdowns
It's funny that you mention vim. vim seems to b
> My slowdown problems are on my web server, so its concerning different
> things than Evolution. but this slowdown was very easy to notice when
> writing something with vim.
>
> Anyways, i remembered that i was using stable kernel without this
> happening some time ago. So i tested 2.6.14.x , 2.6.
Thorsten Hirsch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've seen the mails in the mail archive concerning a slow-down problem
> with reiser4. Seems like I've got the same problem. My kernel is
> 2.6.14-mm2 (gentoo) and my default disk scheduler is anticipatory, but
> I've also tried cqf and I'd say that it depends on t
Hi,
I've seen the mails in the mail archive concerning a slow-down problem
with reiser4. Seems like I've got the same problem. My kernel is
2.6.14-mm2 (gentoo) and my default disk scheduler is anticipatory, but
I've also tried cqf and I'd say that it depends on the application for
which scheduler
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 19:04 +0100, Laurent Riffard wrote:
> Please, could you do it again with the -T option for strace? It will
> show the time spent in system calls.
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ strace -T -p 8002 2>&1 | grep fsync
fsync(26) = 0 <0.566159>
fsync(26)
Le 15.11.2005 15:27, Craig Shelley a écrit :
> On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 21:47 +0100, Christian Iversen wrote:
>
>>That's _serisouly_ odd. I've seen something like this happen before, when X
>>programs generated some (non-harmful) X warnings. These were then written
>>into a log file, typically .xse
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 21:47 +0100, Christian Iversen wrote:
> That's _serisouly_ odd. I've seen something like this happen before, when X
> programs generated some (non-harmful) X warnings. These were then written
> into a log file, typically .xsession-errors or similar. Any chance that's
> what
Hello
rvalles wrote:
> Still having the same problem, with 2.6.14.2 patched with 2.6.14-1
> reiser4 patch.
>
> It's easy to trigger it while editing a file with vim, and it does take
> a hell of a long wait (while it hits the disk for a minute or so,
> sometimes) for it to unlock.
I notice this
12 matches
Mail list logo
