Two ways Microsoft sabotages Linux desktop adoption
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
Wed Feb 15 04:55:03 UTC 2006
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 22:17, Mike McCarty wrote:
> >>>>Its a 2.4gHz Athlon box.
> >>>>
> >>>>Something wrong with your 58 second machine there Mike :-(
> >>>
> >>>----
> >>>take his commentary with a grain of salt and recognize that he is using
> >>>FC-2 which I am sure few will argue was better abandoned for FC-3
> >>
> >>Are you suggesting that FC4 would load it any faster?
> >
> >
> > Probably but I think you have a specific problem on that machine.
>
> I suspect the specific problem I have is lack of RAM.
Or too many programs loaded. Adding RAM is easier than sorting
out what you don't really need to run, though.
> > I've got a dual pII-450 running FC1 that starts OO in about 10
> > seconds. The first instance of Firefox with google as the home
> > page takes about 5 seconds, another window about 2. Does
> > hdparm -T -t show somewhere near 30MB/sec for buffered reads?
> >
>
> # hdparm -T -t /dev/hda
>
> /dev/hda:
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 1096 MB in 2.00 seconds = 547.54 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 66 MB in 3.02 seconds = 21.86 MB/sec
>
> Is that close enough to 30MB/s?
It's less than my ancient PII-450 gets with an almost-as-old
66 mHZ IDE card. A 2.4 gHZ P4 that should be closer to your
specs gets 60MB/s. Do you see something like:
hda: 234441648 sectors (120034 MB) w/8192KiB Cache, CHS=16383/255/63,
UDMA(100)
if you look at 'dmesg | less'? (The UDMA and speed being
the relevant part).
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list