On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 12:52:22AM +0200, Ira Abramov wrote: > Quoting Yedidyah Bar-David, from the post of Sat, 13 Nov: > > > > > > I surf in tabs. when I middle-click a link, there's a pretty long freeze > > > while the mozilla allocates the memory for the new tab, draws the tab, > > > starts twirling the download graphic, and finally the window is > > > responsive to the mouse cursor again. this process takes under 1/20 of > > > the time on the same machine running Firefox under windows. > > > > mozilla, on Debian, is a script that does mozilla-bin -remote, if it > > already runs. So one way to measure such things is to do > > time xtoolwait sh -c 'mozilla; sleep 2' > > then I would be timing bash and several other unimportant elements. I'm
You will, but they do not take time. Not more than 1%, my estimation. % time sh -c 'sleep 0' real 0m0.014s user 0m0.010s sys 0m0.000s > talking about a case where I fire a new tab (not a new process) from > within the program. the the time it takes to open the tab, and load the > page, may take 6-10 seconds, where it's less than a second on windows. > As if the windows version opens a new thread and I get the GUI > responsive again, while on Linux it acts as if it all blocks for several > long seconds. I must say this doesn't sound to me like a performace problem, but like something that waits for something until it times out. Something like the famous "no reverse lookup" that comes up here once in a while. > > > > I could not care less about loading time of programs that get started > > > twice a week and stay open all the time... it's the work speed I am > > > annoyed by. > > > > Sorry, more people use my machine (at home) so I can't. I think for > > some time now about stuff like VNC/nx. Anyone cares to share their > > experience? I must say it puzzles me how it turned out that technically > > you are still running on a P2/166 and you want a multiuser desktop > environment? that's masochism! As an XTerminal. It's not that bad for that. Even with KDE (and I use fvwm). The only thing that I run locally and is slow is xawtv (because it's more convenient to put the card in it than in the server). It is decent only if I lower the resolution. Not the size of the window, BTW - the resolution. I do not know why, but it's not such a bother. Not a P2, BTW - P2 started as 233Mhz. And, now that I am thinking about it, it's underclocked to 120Mhz (I do not remember why I did this), with no noticable difference (as an XTerminal). > > > > maybe I have a general problem with memory management? it sometimes also > > > takes 5-6 seconds for vim to allocate and run when forked (usually from > > > within mutt...) > > > > Again, very weird. > > $ time vim -c :q > > real 0m0.085s > > user 0m0.050s > > sys 0m0.020s > > I said SOMETIMES. and of course I can't time this when VIM is already in > the read cache. Why not? If you suspect the disk, check the disk. E.g. if it's very fragmented, it can slow you down considerably. Otherwise, I would rather check it against the cache, not the disk. The times I wrote for "before" and "after" prelink are all from the cache. Times from the disk (checked by prerunning a program that uses a lot of memory, not by rebooting) were around twice slower. -- Didi ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
