On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 09:49:06AM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: > On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 08:48:01AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Doug Barton writes: > > >Kirk, > > > > > >I'm adding a bunch of people to the list who were involved in a thread > > >on -current on this topic. I also tried this change and noticed that > > >things did seem a tiny bit snappier (although my system is slow enough > > >that it could have just been my imagination). > > > > All things considered, I think we should just pla to leave it this way > > for 5.0-R. Until now people were used to wait for fsck to finish, at > > least now they can do something in while it runs. > > Well... like I indicated earlier in the thread on -CURRENT, things > were definitely *slow*. I also said I would try to provide benchmarks > if people told me how to do that (and what to time). In any case, > as a rough measurement, starting X on -CURRENT took about 2-3 seconds > vs. about half a second on -STABLE on the exact same hardware. > > It was even measurable on a simple 'ls' in a large directory. > > I think if this is left in as is, people 'new' to FreeBSD will think > it's dead slow, and move on elsewhere.
Whoops, monday morning brain fart.
Ignore my previous mail, I didn't get the fact that the switch defaulted to
*off*. Am I reading it correctly now, that the ioslow sleep is therefore also
not enabled by default?
--Stijn
--
The most reliable proof that there are extraterrestrial intelligent
lifeforms out there is that nobody actually tries to get in contact
with us.
-- Dirk Mueller
msg46045/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
