Multi-tasking
Matej Cepl
I really do not want to flame (I have been using KDE for many years and I do
not mean to change anything about that), but can anybody explain why KDE
has so lousy multi-tasking? Or is it whole Linux? I have noticed it for
long time, but couple of days I was working on Windows XP and running
something terribly complicated with Access, it was running completely out
of its mind, but when I switched to the other window where I had Excel, I
could work without problems and I have hardly noticed almost dying Access
on the background. Whenever I run something more complicated in Linux (gcc,
update of slocate dbase), whole computer goes almost to halt (and it is not
that bad computer -- Dell Inspiron 2200 notebook w/ Celeron 1.4GHz, 512MB
RAM). I believe that Linux should have perfect multi-everything, but
apparently there is some problem with my configuration.
Can anybody kick me in the right direction?
Thanks,
Matěj
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
I used to date a woman who did PR and marketing for MS, so you
can imagine we had some in-depth and sometimes heated
discussions about MS vs. Linux and Macs.
Well, one day we were going hiking, and she presented me with
a really nice backback. The only issue with it was that it had
the MS logo emblazoned all over it. Of course, she knew
I wouldn't refuse it.
Anyway, she said to me, "Isn't that nice? See? What'd RedHat
ever give you for free?"
I replied, "An operating system."
That was one long, quiet hike.
-- disserto on Slashdot
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl\
?sid=138492&tid=109&mode=thread&cid=11590292
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kd...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Leopold Palomo Avellaneda
have you tried to compile yourself a kernel. I think that the debian packages
of kernels have a default behavior of server. From the 2.6 kernels, there's
an option in the multitask about preemptive or server. A preemptive kernel
has a better "feeling" for the desktop user than the server.
Regards,
Leo
A Dimecres 28 Juny 2006 05:09, Matej Cepl va escriure:
--
--
Linux User 152692
PGP: 0xF944807E
Catalonia
Alejandro Exojo
> Hi,
>
> I really do not want to flame (I have been using KDE for many years and I
> do not mean to change anything about that), but can anybody explain why KDE
> has so lousy multi-tasking? Or is it whole Linux? I have noticed it for
> long time, but couple of days I was working on Windows XP and running
> something terribly complicated with Access, it was running completely out
> of its mind, but when I switched to the other window where I had Excel, I
> could work without problems and I have hardly noticed almost dying Access
> on the background. Whenever I run something more complicated in Linux (gcc,
> update of slocate dbase), whole computer goes almost to halt (and it is not
> that bad computer -- Dell Inspiron 2200 notebook w/ Celeron 1.4GHz, 512MB
> RAM). I believe that Linux should have perfect multi-everything, but
> apparently there is some problem with my configuration.
I have an Athlon 800, and when I download my email, kmail blocks completely,
and doesn't refreshes until spamassassin finishes processing at least the
current email, but if I switch to another application, it works very well.
Which kernel are you using? I always run the default debian kernel, and I
noticed that the responsiveness of the desktop improved a lot in some 2.6
release (i suppose because the scheduler was different).
--
Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2
http://barnacity.net/ - Jabber ID: s...@bulmalug.net
cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
> Hi,
>
> I really do not want to flame (I have been using KDE for many years and I
> do not mean to change anything about that), but can anybody explain why
> KDE has so lousy multi-tasking? Or is it whole Linux? I have noticed it
> for long time, but couple of days I was working on Windows XP and running
> something terribly complicated with Access, it was running completely out
> of its mind, but when I switched to the other window where I had Excel, I
> could work without problems and I have hardly noticed almost dying Access
> on the background. Whenever I run something more complicated in Linux
> (gcc, update of slocate dbase), whole computer goes almost to halt (and
> it is not that bad computer -- Dell Inspiron 2200 notebook w/ Celeron
> 1.4GHz, 512MB RAM). I believe that Linux should have perfect
> multi-everything, but apparently there is some problem with my
> configuration.
>
> Can anybody kick me in the right direction?
Is anything trying to write/read large amounts of data when this happens? if
so you might want to:
- check the settings for your harddisk (notably DMA)
- also which filessystem are you using? reiserfs3 has problems locking up
the system under high load
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
André Wöbbeking
I sometimes have this problem and thought that it's related to SATA. But
I'm using reiserfs3. Do you've more infos about its problems under high
load.
Anders E. Andersen
> on the background. Whenever I run something more complicated in Linux (gcc,
> update of slocate dbase), whole computer goes almost to halt (and it is not
> that bad computer -- Dell Inspiron 2200 notebook w/ Celeron 1.4GHz, 512MB
> RAM). I believe that Linux should have perfect multi-everything, but
> apparently there is some problem with my configuration.
>
> Can anybody kick me in the right direction?
>
Pretty much the only thing that comes to my mind is if you are running a
kernel that has been compiled with the 'preemptible kernel' option.
Without a preemptible kernel, the desktop experience is not as good.
Anders
David Martínez Moreno
> I have an Athlon 800, and when I download my email, kmail blocks
> completely, and doesn't refreshes until spamassassin finishes processing at
> least the current email, but if I switch to another application, it works
> very well.
That is the most annoying KMail feature I have seen, and I find unbelievable
that KMail developers hadn't taken care of it yet. It is...two years old?
Three? And it makes KMail unuseable with a spamassassin configured with DNS
queries. :-(
The last time I debugged the problem it was due to KMail looking every
timeslice it has into the pipe it opens to spamassasin, not every, say, half
a second.
Regards,
Ender.
--
Mr. Anderson! Welcome back, we missed you.
-- Agent Smith (Matrix Revolutions).
--
Desarrollador de Debian
Debian developer
Frans Pop
> That is the most annoying KMail feature I have seen, and I find
> unbelievable that KMail developers hadn't taken care of it yet. It
> is...two years old? Three? And it makes KMail unuseable with a
> spamassassin configured with DNS queries. :-(
Do you happen to have a workaround that makes it a bit less annoying?
David Martínez Moreno
I was thinking of it a lot in past times, and the only workaround was to
add -L to OPTIONS in /etc/default/spamassassin in order to make only local
checks, and even then, KMail is not truly asynchronous as it is while sending
mail, for example, so it effectively blocks the UI when checking. Recent
KMails behaved a bit better, but they are not yet asynchronous.
The other option that I considered, but haven't time to work in, was to
install mpop and spamc (and probably fetchmail) as a former step, and then
pull scanned mail from localhost. But the real problem will be there, that
is, KMail freezing when reading from a pipe.
The last option is learning some C++, Qt, and KDE internals, and get wet with
the code.
Nothing that anybody couldn't reach with some hours of frustration and a fine
sense of stubbornness. I hope my analysis helps you.
Best regards,
Ender.
--
Look at my fingers: four stones, four crates! Zero stones? ZERO CRATES!
-- Zorg (The Fifth Element).
Leopold Palomo Avellaneda
> Matej Cepl skrev:
> > on the background. Whenever I run something more complicated in Linux
> > (gcc, update of slocate dbase), whole computer goes almost to halt (and
> > it is not that bad computer -- Dell Inspiron 2200 notebook w/ Celeron
> > 1.4GHz, 512MB RAM). I believe that Linux should have perfect
> > multi-everything, but apparently there is some problem with my
> > configuration.
> >
> > Can anybody kick me in the right direction?
>
> Pretty much the only thing that comes to my mind is if you are running a
> kernel that has been compiled with the 'preemptible kernel' option.
Desktop --> preemtive
Server --> no preemtive
Leo
cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
> On Wednesday 28 June 2006 12:15, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote:
> > On Wednesday 28 June 2006 05:09, Matej Cepl wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > Is anything trying to write/read large amounts of data when this
> > happens? if so you might want to:
> > - check the settings for your harddisk (notably DMA)
> > - also which filessystem are you using? reiserfs3 has problems
> > locking up the system under high load
>
> I sometimes have this problem and thought that it's related to SATA. But
> I'm using reiserfs3. Do you've more infos about its problems under high
> load.
YMMV, I can't remember where I read the details, but the FAQ at [1] has:
Q: Why do things freeze on my IDE hard drive for annoying amounts of time
A: Because when large writes are scheduled all at once, reads can starve. A
fix for this is evolving; the later your ReiserFS patch, the better we
handle this.
(it's been over a year since I was using reiserfs, this problem made my
laptop completely unusable for 10minutes+ when doing e.g. svn update on the
d-i repository, i finally 'fixed' it by switching to ext3, situation might
have improved since then)
[1] http://www.namesys.com/faq.html
David Martínez Moreno
> Pretty much the only thing that comes to my mind is if you are running a
> kernel that has been compiled with the 'preemptible kernel' option.
s/with/without/
> Without a preemptible kernel, the desktop experience is not as good.
You can see if you have such kernel, if you compiled in the option for
including the configuration in the running kernel:
If you have /proc/config:
ender@polgara:~$ cat /proc/config |grep PREE
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT is not set
If you have a compressed one (as I do):
ender@polgara:~$ zcat /proc/config.gz |grep PREE
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL=y
# CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT is not set
Mine is compiled for desktop. Debian kernels are not (they have
CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y and CONFIG_PREEMPT=n.
Best regards,
Ender.
--
El conceto es el conceto.
-- Pazos (Airbag).
André Wöbbeking
>
> The last option is learning some C++, Qt, and KDE internals, and get
> wet with the code.
I'm sure help is always welcome :-) But I don't think that anythink is
changed in 3.5.x. We have to wait until KDE 4.
Cheers,
André
Matej Cepl
> Which kernel are you using? I always run the default debian kernel, and I
> noticed that the responsiveness of the desktop improved a lot in some 2.6
> release (i suppose because the scheduler was different).
hand-compiled vanilla+suspend2 2.6.17.1
Thanks for the reply,
Matej
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
I know of no country in which there is so little independence of
mind and real freedom of discussion as in America.
-- Alexis de Tocqueville
Matej Cepl
> have you tried to compile yourself a kernel. I think that the debian
> packages of kernels have a default behavior of server. From the 2.6
> kernels, there's an option in the multitask about preemptive or server. A
> preemptive kernel has a better "feeling" for the desktop user than the
> server.
Which of these should be set? All of them?
chelcicky:~$ grep -i pree /boot/config-$(uname -r)
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE is not set
CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y
# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
chelcicky:~$
Matej
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they
can bribe the people with their own money.
-- Alexis de Tocqueville
Nate Bargmann
Okay, so my stock Debian kernel config shows the following:
CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL is not set
So, I presume they are not compiled for desktop use then? Has anyone
filed a wishlist bug to get a set of kernels that are pre-emptive?
- Nate >>
--
Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft
Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998.
http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of
My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @ | a GNU generation!"
http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Matej Cepl
> have you tried to compile yourself a kernel. I think that the debian
> packages of kernels have a default behavior of server. From the 2.6
> kernels, there's an option in the multitask about preemptive or server. A
> preemptive kernel has a better "feeling" for the desktop user than the
> server.
Why, oh why I haven't asked this question before (using Linux for almost six
years and never suspected that my kernel configuration is anything than
perfect)? :'(
Thanks a lot, I have recompiled kernel with CONFIG_PREEMPT and it seems to
be really *much* more responsive. Why is this not more popularized?
Best,
Matěj
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
A fool-proof method for sculpting an elephant: first, get a huge
block of marble; then you chip away everything that doesn't look
like an elephant.
Matej Cepl
> I sometimes have this problem and thought that it's related to SATA. But
> I'm using reiserfs3. Do you've more infos about its problems under high
> load.
No, the problem was non-preemptive kernel -- this is just plain ext3
notebook (no fancy server filesystems here).
Matej
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
A nuclear war can ruin your whole day.
Rafael Rodríguez
Your computer should work fine with all the given suggestions. But if you want
to improve your desktop experience even more, try Con Kolivas kernel patch:
http://members.optusnet.com.au/ckolivas/kernel/
Here, I can compile several things at the same time while listening to music
with Amarok flawlessly :) Simply great
My 2 cents <--- always wanted to say this
El Miércoles, 28 de Junio de 2006 12:25, Matej Cepl escribió:
> Leopold Palomo Avellaneda wrote:
> > have you tried to compile yourself a kernel. I think that the debian
> > packages of kernels have a default behavior of server. From the 2.6
> > kernels, there's an option in the multitask about preemptive or server. A
> > preemptive kernel has a better "feeling" for the desktop user than the
> > server.
>
> Which of these should be set? All of them?
>
> chelcicky:~$ grep -i pree /boot/config-$(uname -r)
> # CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE is not set
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y
> # CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
> chelcicky:~$
>
> Matej
>
> --
> GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
> http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
> 23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
>
> The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they
> can bribe the people with their own money.
> -- Alexis de Tocqueville
--
Rafael Rodríguez
Anders E. Andersen
Wasn't that what I wrote? :)
Anders E. Andersen
> Why, oh why I haven't asked this question before (using Linux for almost six
> years and never suspected that my kernel configuration is anything than
> perfect)? :'(
>
> Thanks a lot, I have recompiled kernel with CONFIG_PREEMPT and it seems to
> be really *much* more responsive. Why is this not more popularized?
>
Surprised you missed it actually.. :)
Anders
Nate Bargmann
> filed a wishlist bug to get a set of kernels that are pre-emptive?
I filed a wishlist bug against linux-source-2.6.17 so we shall see what
happens.
Nate Bargmann
Nate Bargmann
- Nate >>
Matej Cepl
>> So, I presume they are not compiled for desktop use then? Has anyone
>> filed a wishlist bug to get a set of kernels that are pre-emptive?
>
> I filed a wishlist bug against linux-source-2.6.17 so we shall see what
> happens.
And if they add to this version of kernel also suspend2 patch and call it
desktop (or laptop) I could abstain from compiling my own kernel.
What is the number of the bug?
Matej
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
He loves nature in spite of what it did to him.
-- Forrest Tucker
Raúl Sánchez Siles
Here is something I have always liked to asks but I hadn't had the chance.
The problem is that on my job PC, I use reiser over a LVM over a SATA disk.
When I have some disk intensive tasks/intervals, my system turns not as
responsive as I wish and as I think should be.
In this situation, I have tried doing top on a konsole, and I find that the
field "wa" in the above part of the top report, in the middle of "id"
and "hi" raises to 80-90%. I don't know what exactly this field means, but I
bet for cpu-wait state as it is the case in disk I/O.
All of this guessing yields me to the conclusion that I'm sometimes wasting
up to 90% of cpu time waiting or just doing nothing, I can't understand this.
As I'm not sure about the SATA details (I'm used to PATA) I think I have the
best configuration, even DMA, but this go on happening.
On my laptop, which includes a Dell PATA disk, the supposed "wait" states
doesn't rise bigger than 30-40%.
What could be happening here? Is this normal?.
Thanks for your attention. I know this is OT, but I would appreciate
redirection to a possible source of information related to this.
Cheers,
--
Raúl Sánchez Siles
----->Proud Debian user<-----
Linux registered user #416098
Nate Bargmann
> Nate Bargmann wrote:
> >> So, I presume they are not compiled for desktop use then? Has anyone
> >> filed a wishlist bug to get a set of kernels that are pre-emptive?
> >
> > I filed a wishlist bug against linux-source-2.6.17 so we shall see what
> > happens.
>
> And if they add to this version of kernel also suspend2 patch and call it
> desktop (or laptop) I could abstain from compiling my own kernel.
>
> What is the number of the bug?
375845 Here is the report:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=375845
- Nate >>
P.S. Those other two duplicates were me trying to get kmail working with
Firefox... Don't ask!
--
Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | Successfully Microsoft
Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | free since January 1998.
http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | "Debian, the choice of
My Kawasaki KZ-650 SR @ | a GNU generation!"
http://www.networksplus.net/n0nb/ | http://www.debian.org
Dietz Proepper
> Here is something I have always liked to asks but I hadn't had the
> chance. The problem is that on my job PC, I use reiser over a LVM over a
> SATA disk. When I have some disk intensive tasks/intervals, my system
> turns not as responsive as I wish and as I think should be.
One part of the problem is crappy PC hardware :-\. Most certainly, the SATA
tranfers block the PCI bus and use up parts of your memory bandwidth while
transfering data, which is a bad thing. The other part (even with
non-crap) - you're putting heavy load on your disk subsystem from one
process. Now, if another process tries to do disk i/o, the heavy load from
the other process slows it down.
> In this situation, I have tried doing top on a konsole, and I find
> that the field "wa" in the above part of the top report, in the middle
> of "id" and "hi" raises to 80-90%. I don't know what exactly this field
> means, but I bet for cpu-wait state as it is the case in disk I/O.
It's the amount of time, your systems spends waiting for i/o requests to
finish, and its quite normal to have 90%+ i/o wait while you're doing disk
i/o. In an ideal world, the disk operation should not influence the rest
of the system too much (apart from slowing down other disk i/o.)
> All of this guessing yields me to the conclusion that I'm sometimes
> wasting up to 90% of cpu time waiting or just doing nothing, I can't
If you're not typing very, very fast (or run some seti stuff in the
background all the time), your system spends nearly 100% of it's time
doing nothing ;-).
Felipe Figueiredo
> Leopold Palomo Avellaneda wrote:
> > have you tried to compile yourself a kernel. I think that the debian
> > packages of kernels have a default behavior of server. From the 2.6
> > kernels, there's an option in the multitask about preemptive or server. A
> > preemptive kernel has a better "feeling" for the desktop user than the
> > server.
>
> Why, oh why I haven't asked this question before (using Linux for almost
> six years and never suspected that my kernel configuration is anything than
> perfect)? :'(
>
> Thanks a lot, I have recompiled kernel with CONFIG_PREEMPT and it seems to
> be really *much* more responsive. Why is this not more popularized?
Wouldn't it make much sense if debian had two kernel pakages? One suited for
desktop and one for server? I guess it should be about time by now to have
such concerns. Maybe that would be a sugestion for utnubu crew?
regards
FF
Matej Cepl
> Wouldn't it make much sense if debian had two kernel pakages? One suited
> for desktop and one for server? I guess it should be about time by now to
> have such concerns. Maybe that would be a sugestion for utnubu crew?
That's bug# 375845 <http://bugs.debian.org/375845> and also I have found
that there is a special subproject (which seems to be almost dead)
debian-desktop <http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-desktop/> (they at least
somehow alive wiki on <http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDesktop>).
Best,
Matěj
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
The ratio of literacy to illiteracy is a constant, but nowadays
the illiterates can read.
-- Alberto Moravia
Raúl Sánchez Siles
El Jueves, 29 de Junio de 2006 10:20, Dietz Proepper escribió:
> Raúl Sánchez Siles:
>
> > In this situation, I have tried doing top on a konsole, and I find
> > that the field "wa" in the above part of the top report, in the middle
> > of "id" and "hi" raises to 80-90%. I don't know what exactly this field
> > means, but I bet for cpu-wait state as it is the case in disk I/O.
>
> It's the amount of time, your systems spends waiting for i/o requests to
> finish, and its quite normal to have 90%+ i/o wait while you're doing disk
> i/o. In an ideal world, the disk operation should not influence the rest
> of the system too much (apart from slowing down other disk i/o.)
>
I currently use the deadline scheduler, do you think using another schedule
would improve things¿?
> > All of this guessing yields me to the conclusion that I'm sometimes
> > wasting up to 90% of cpu time waiting or just doing nothing, I can't
>
> If you're not typing very, very fast (or run some seti stuff in the
> background all the time), your system spends nearly 100% of it's time
> doing nothing ;-).
The thing here is that I don't mind "idle-ing" the CPU when I don't need it,
but bloating it waiting when I do need it. ;)
Rafael Rodríguez
> I currently use the deadline scheduler, do you think using another
> schedule would improve things¿?
Staircase scheduler rocks all the way, and also CFQ2 for I/O. But they're only
available in CK patch i use here :)
Ritesh Raj Sarraf
> Hi,
>
> I really do not want to flame (I have been using KDE for many years and I do
> not mean to change anything about that), but can anybody explain why KDE
> has so lousy multi-tasking? Or is it whole Linux? I have noticed it for
> long time, but couple of days I was working on Windows XP and running
> something terribly complicated with Access, it was running completely out
> of its mind, but when I switched to the other window where I had Excel, I
> could work without problems and I have hardly noticed almost dying Access
> on the background. Whenever I run something more complicated in Linux (gcc,
> update of slocate dbase), whole computer goes almost to halt (and it is not
> that bad computer -- Dell Inspiron 2200 notebook w/ Celeron 1.4GHz, 512MB
> RAM). I believe that Linux should have perfect multi-everything, but
> apparently there is some problem with my configuration.
>
> Can anybody kick me in the right direction?
>
You're using a laptop. So I guess you're just another use like me. You won't be
running database daemons or other server daemons on the laptop.
All I can suggest is to recompile your kernel with the following features:
1) Use 1000HZ for Kernel Timer Frequency (I highly recommend it)
2) Enable Kernel Preemption for Low Latency Desktops
3) Use "Preempt The BIG Kernel Lock"
4) Use CFQ as the I/O scheduler
Wish Debian shipped a laptop specific kernel like linux-image-X.X.XX-laptop
I've also been willing to do this but don't have the proper resources.
HTH,
Ritesh
--
Ritesh Raj Sarraf
RESEARCHUT - http://www.researchut.com
"Necessity is the mother of invention."
"Stealing logic from one person is plagiarism, stealing from many is research."
"The great are those who achieve the impossible, the petty are those who
cannot - rrs"
Rigo Wenning
just tried to find the debian kernel-source for a 2.6 kernel in sid and there
was none... I admit that I was a bit surprised. (unstable, isn't it ;) I
thought it must be my fault (screwed aptitude or so), but no, the official
web-interface gives the same result.
A stock kernel will do it, so just to alert other people.
Best,
Rigo
Am Sunday 02 July 2006 21:03, sprach Ritesh Raj Sarraf:
Michael Thaler
> Nice tip,
>
> just tried to find the debian kernel-source for a 2.6 kernel in sid and
> there was none... I admit that I was a bit surprised. (unstable, isn't it
> ;) I thought it must be my fault (screwed aptitude or so), but no, the
> official web-interface gives the same result.
The debian kernel sources for 2.6 kernels are in sid. It is called
linux-source-2.6.15 (for example).
Greetings,
Michael
Alejandro Bárcena Campos
Hash: SHA1
Rigo Wenning wrote:
> Nice tip,
>
> just tried to find the debian kernel-source for a 2.6 kernel in sid and there
> was none... I admit that I was a bit surprised. (unstable, isn't it ;) I
> thought it must be my fault (screwed aptitude or so), but no, the official
> web-interface gives the same result.
>
> A stock kernel will do it, so just to alert other people.
>
> Best,
>
> Rigo
m77@shikia:~$ apt-cache search linux-source
linux-patch-debian-2.6.16 - Debian patches to version 2.6.16 of the
Linux kernel
linux-patch-debian-2.6.17 - Debian patches to version 2.6.17 of the
Linux kernel
linux-source-2.6.16 - Linux kernel source for version 2.6.16 with Debian
patches
linux-source-2.6.17 - Linux kernel source for version 2.6.17 with Debian
patches
linux-tree-2.6.16 - Linux kernel source tree for building Debian kernel
images
linux-tree-2.6.17 - Linux kernel source tree for building Debian kernel
images
Check your sources.list
Alejandro Bárcena
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEqN4lpZP6bMridNYRAtOuAJ9HWmdlH60tI17BF6Fu5OYZnOJgcwCgqAVQ
S2KLu/B9xMx9IA998brG7C4=
=0kNa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Alejandro Exojo
> just tried to find the debian kernel-source for a 2.6 kernel in sid and
> there was none... I admit that I was a bit surprised. (unstable, isn't it
> ;) I thought it must be my fault (screwed aptitude or so), but no, the
> official web-interface gives the same result.
As others noted, now the source of the linux kernel, is in linux-source, not
in kernel-source, because Debian supports (or will support) more than one
kernel, for example:
http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/
If you are curious, there is a live CD:
http://glibc-bsd.alioth.debian.org/ging/
--
Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2
http://barnacity.net/ - Jabber ID: s...@bulmalug.net
Matej Cepl
>> just tried to find the debian kernel-source for a 2.6 kernel in sid and
>> there was none... I admit that I was a bit surprised. (unstable, isn't it
>> ;) I thought it must be my fault (screwed aptitude or so), but no, the
>> official web-interface gives the same result.
Just one curious question -- I have been running for couple of years plain
vanilla kernel from kernel.org (now compiling 2.6.17.3) just with suspend2
patch. Is there anything interesting in Debian-applied patches which I am
missing (for laptop -- so server-related patches are not concern to me)? Is
there somewhere list of all patches applied against pristine vanilla kernel
in Debian?
Thanks,
Matěj
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address
on it?
-- Mark Twain
Martin Steigerwald
> El miércoles, 28 de junio de 2006 11:50, Alejandro Exojo escribió:
> > I have an Athlon 800, and when I download my email, kmail blocks
> > completely, and doesn't refreshes until spamassassin finishes processing
> > at least the current email, but if I switch to another application, it
> > works very well.
>
> That is the most annoying KMail feature I have seen, and I find
> unbelievable that KMail developers hadn't taken care of it yet. It is...two
> years old? Three? And it makes KMail unuseable with a spamassassin
> configured with DNS queries. :-(
Hello,
there is a - well at least one - huge bug report about it:
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41514
> The last time I debugged the problem it was due to KMail looking every
> timeslice it has into the pipe it opens to spamassasin, not every, say,
> half a second.
Hmmm, I would have thought the problem is just that KMail starts the spam
filter synchronously. This might not be that easy to change.
I used bogofilter which I believe to use less resources than spamassassin
while still giving good results (once I learned it).
I found out that it likes large buffer sizes when the spam database grows, so
I added "-k 50" as option to the bogofilter related filter rules. The best
value may vary depending on the available RAM and the size of spam
database... the man page says "The recommended size is one third of the size
of the database file.", but I use more and I believe it helps.
I also regularily run a script like this:
#!/bin/bash
bf_compact ~/.bogofilter
rm -rf ~/.bogofilter.old
But I really only required it on my notebook which seems to get more spam than
my workstation at work.
I would like to try out KMail with crm114, but it may take quite some time
till I manage to take the time to try it out.
Regards,
--
Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de
gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90
Martin Steigerwald
> You're using a laptop. So I guess you're just another use like me. You
> won't be running database daemons or other server daemons on the
> laptop.
>
> All I can suggest is to recompile your kernel with the following
> features: 1) Use 1000HZ for Kernel Timer Frequency (I highly recommend
> it) 2) Enable Kernel Preemption for Low Latency Desktops
> 3) Use "Preempt The BIG Kernel Lock"
> 4) Use CFQ as the I/O scheduler
Hello Ritesh,
thats pretty much what I use here too. I think those are fairly good
options for a vanilla kernel. But those patches from Con Kolivas sound
nice, too.
First I look whether 2.6.17.1 + xfs-fix patch + sws2 is really stable now
with XFS and write caches on... see:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6757
(seems fine upto now)
and
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6380
(seems fine with write caches on now but I like to test a bit longer)
Regards,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
Matej Cepl
> All I can suggest is to recompile your kernel with the following features:
> 1) Use 1000HZ for Kernel Timer Frequency (I highly recommend it)
> 2) Enable Kernel Preemption for Low Latency Desktops
> 3) Use "Preempt The BIG Kernel Lock"
> 4) Use CFQ as the I/O scheduler
Thanks, surprisingly I had all of them on already, except for the second
one.
Matěj
--
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: cep...@jabber.cz
23 Marion St. #3, (617) 876-1259, ICQ 132822213
[W]hat country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time that [the] people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms...The tree of liberty must be
refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and
tyrants.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Col. William S. Smith, 1787