Hello Ray, hello all,
> > > > > I use the new stuff on a 486/66, 16mb ram, disless boot via nfs an
> > > > > suse 6.2.
> > > >
> > > > Kernel 2.2.14 with 16 MB RAM? Does that really work? Then one can guess
> > > > that
> > > Certainly, my 2.2.12 packet box is a 486/100 with 16mb, also diskless (ie:
> > > no swap!)
> >
> > Sounds a little bit strange of one has the recommendations for 2.2.x
> > (gathered from several information sources) in mind:
> >
> > Pentium class computer, preferrably 300 MHz and above
> > 64 MB RAM or more (the more, the better)
> >
> > So, I even was a little bit afraid if Slackware 7, which comes with 2.2.13,
> > would run on my K6-2/400 with 64 MB RAM - but it does (I am still
> > estonished).
>
> I have no idea where you get this idea from. The 2.2.x kernels are designed to
> be better in terms of memory management and swap space management. It is true
> that many of my kernels compile to be quite large, but they are usually
> smaller than the old RH kernels for 2.0.x kernels.
The information comes from several german computer magazines stating that you
need at least 64 MB physical RAM in order to get a benefit of the new
kernel's memory management features.
> I experienced a significant improvment in performance for some operations
> after upgrading to a 2.2 kernel.
>
> I have run 2.2 kernels on 486sx25s with 16MB of RAM very successfully.
And is there also a performance improvement visible? Even if someone could
assure me that these kernels do not slow down older hardware I would be glad.
Then, I could even use a Pentium 133 (w/o MMX) with 32 MB RAM that I
assembled from spare parts with Linux 2.2.14 - that would be not bad at all.
But, a 386 DX 40 with 8 MB should rather stick to 2.0.38, shouldn't it?
Cheers, 73
Gerd
--
Gerd Roethig
Universit�t Leipzig, Medizinische Klinik u. PK I
Johannisallee 32, 04103 Leipzig
Tel. (0341) 97 12622, Fax (0341) 97 12515
