I cannot confirm your observation. I've 'bootcharted' two systems and with both sreadahead was slower than not using preloading at all - readahead-list was faster [I've stopped before GDM loading for pack file generation and used that list with readahead].
Sys 1 (AMD Opteron 144 @ 2.65GHz, 2GB RAM, 7200rpm disk): - pack file: 733 files with 73.456.165 bytes * no (s)readahead: 18.0s * readahead: 17.4s * sreadahead: 18.4s * sreadahead started with --no-fork: 19.3s Sys 2 (Intel Core Duo T2400 @ 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM, 5400rpm disk): - pack file: 829 files with 57.408.165 bytes * no (s)readahead: 23.1s * readahead: 21.9s * sreadahead: 24.6s * sreadahead started with --no-fork: 24.3s The gap is not big but it's there. --- 2.6.31-9-generic (Core Duo system used -7-generic) readahead: Installed: 1:0.20050517.0220-1ubuntu5 sreadahead: Installed: 1.0-2 -- Improve so it works on HDD disks https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/338822 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
