On Sunday, 8 בMay 2011 19:42:55 is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2011 19:19:25 +0300
guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
and how is all this related to solaris Vs. linux? solaris is *nix, at
least was the last time i heard ;)
Yes, you are right, but for some reason Solaris has
On Tue, 10 May 2011 21:57:53 +0300
Oron Peled o...@actcom.co.il wrote:
On Sunday, 8 בMay 2011 19:42:55 is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2011 19:19:25 +0300
guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
and how is all this related to solaris Vs. linux? solaris is *nix, at
least was the
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 06:29 +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
[This E-mail message is bottom-posting contrary to my usual custom.]
Thanks :)
1. Kernel version?
2.6.38 added a very small patch that that done wonders to eliminate
foreground process scheduling issues that plagued desktop setups since
Hello Gilboa,
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 09:43 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
1. Kernel version?
Standard Debian Squeeze kernel:
$ uname -a
Linux c4 2.6.32-5-vserver-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Mar 7 23:14:47 UTC 2011
x86_64 GNU/Linux
I'd consider trying a kernel from debian-testing or rolling your
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 03:18:08PM +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
My kernel is configured to have AHCI as a module:
CONFIG_SATA_AHCI=m
However I understand that it means that this module is needed also in
the initrd image. How can I check which modules made it to the initrd
image last time it was
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 15:30 +0300, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 03:18:08PM +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
My kernel is configured to have AHCI as a module:
CONFIG_SATA_AHCI=m
However I understand that it means that this module is needed also in
the initrd image. How can I
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 15:49 +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 15:30 +0300, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 03:18:08PM +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
My kernel is configured to have AHCI as a module:
CONFIG_SATA_AHCI=m
However I understand that it means that
On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 07:28:49AM +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2011, guy keren wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a bottleneck?:
and if you have a lot of money to spend - you could consider buying an
enterprise-grade SSD (e.g. from fusion I/O or from OCZ - although for
your use-case
On Sat, May 07, 2011, Omer Zak wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a bottleneck?:
I suspect that speeding up /usr won't help improve performance that
much. The applications, which seem to be sluggish, deal with a lot of
user data in /home. Furthermore, this user data varies a lot with time,
hence
On Sun, May 08, 2011, is...@zahav.net.il wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a
bottleneck?:
I don't agree with this setup. Regular consumer drives setup with RAID to
stripe are going to be much, much faster and have less problems in the long
run than single SSDs at this point as well as being a better
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Nadav Har'El n...@math.technion.ac.ilwrote:
Instead of buying a huge SSD for thousands of dollars another option you
might consider is to buy a relatively small SSD with just enough space to
hold your / partition and swap space. Even 20 G may be enough.
The
On May 8, 2011, at 9:30 AM, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
I am considering, for my next laptop, and taking into account the fact
that most laptops do not have space for two disks but do have some
kind
of flash memory slot (card reader) - usually SD-something, to have
the
OS on a (e.g.) SD
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 10:02 AM, geoffrey mendelson
geoffreymendel...@gmail.com wrote:
One of the bad things is that standard *NIX files systems are designed with
magnetic media in mind, they update the access time of files every time you
open them. This is bad for files that are opened
On Sun, May 08, 2011, geoffrey mendelson wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a
bottleneck?:
One of the bad things is that standard *NIX files systems are designed
with magnetic media in mind, they update the access time of files
every time you open them. This is bad for files that are opened often
On Sun, May 08, 2011, Nadav Har'El wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a bottleneck?:
Having two hard disks will, at best case, *double* your seek time. This is
Of course, I meant *half*, not *double* :-)
--
Nadav Har'El|Sunday, May 8 2011, 4 Iyyar 5771
n
On Sun, 08 May 2011 09:55:35 +0300
Nadav Har'El n...@math.technion.ac.il wrote:
On Sun, May 08, 2011, is...@zahav.net.il wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a
bottleneck?:
I don't agree with this setup. Regular consumer drives setup with RAID
to stripe are going to be much, much faster and have
On Sun, 08 May 2011 10:02:18 +0300
geoffrey mendelson geoffreymendel...@gmail.com wrote:
One of the bad things is that standard *NIX files systems are designed
with magnetic media in mind, they update the access time of files
every time you open them. This is bad for files that are opened
On Sun, 08 May 2011 10:15:30 +0300
Nadav Har'El n...@math.technion.ac.il wrote:
On Sun, May 08, 2011, Nadav Har'El wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a
bottleneck?:
Having two hard disks will, at best case, *double* your seek time. This
is
Of course, I meant *half*, not *double* :-)
Actually
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 09:57 +0300, shimi wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Nadav Har'El n...@math.technion.ac.il
wrote:
Instead of buying a huge SSD for thousands of dollars
another option you
might consider is to buy a relatively small SSD with just
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 09:30 +0300, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 07:28:49AM +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2011, guy keren wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a bottleneck?:
and if you have a lot of money to spend - you could consider buying an
enterprise-grade SSD
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 12:01 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 09:57 +0300, shimi wrote:
what tends to get worse after the SSD becomes full is writes, not reads.
and combinations of reads and writes make things look worse (the writes
slow down the reads).
You're
On
The rated MTBF of my specific drive is 2 million hours. If I still
know my math, that's some 228 years
Which is meaningless. The life expectency of a drive is closer to the
length of the warranty period. Warranties are decided based upon
projected return rates. The manufacturers
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 12:26 +0300, shimi wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 12:01 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 09:57 +0300, shimi wrote:
what tends to get worse after the SSD becomes full is writes,
not reads.
and
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 1:21 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 12:26 +0300, shimi wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 12:01 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
do you have the ability to extract wear leveling information
from your
SSD? it
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 13:27 +0300, shimi wrote:
b.t.w. IIRC when a cell dies, it does so gracefully; I.e. no data is
lost, and there are spare blocks for that case... and even when
they're all full, you just get to the point that you still have your
data read-only. I vaguely remember I
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 15:29 +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
I have a PC with powerful processor, lots of RAM and SATA hard disk.
Nevertheless I noticed that sometimes applications (evolution E-mail
software and Firefox[iceweasel] Web browser) have the sluggish feel of a
busy system (command line
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 07:31 +, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
at this point Linux (and BSD) still aren't doing SMP
as well as other OS
Care to elaborate?
- Gilboa
___
Linux-il mailing list
Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il
On Sun, 08 May 2011 17:28:07 +0300
Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 07:31 +, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
at this point Linux (and BSD) still aren't doing SMP
as well as other OS
Care to elaborate?
I think it's well-known Solaris exploits multicore better
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 14:56 +, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2011 17:28:07 +0300
Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 07:31 +, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
at this point Linux (and BSD) still aren't doing SMP
as well as other OS
Care to
On Sun, 08 May 2011 18:11:24 +0300
Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 14:56 +, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2011 17:28:07 +0300
Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't track Linux very much but I can see from conky on my boxes Linux
just
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 15:28 +, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2011 18:11:24 +0300
Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 14:56 +, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2011 17:28:07 +0300
Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't track
On Sun, 08 May 2011 19:19:25 +0300
guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
and how is all this related to solaris Vs. linux? solaris is *nix, at
least was the last time i heard ;)
Yes, you are right, but for some reason Solaris has the reputation for
handling multicore better than Linux and BSD.
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 15:28 +, is...@zahav.net.il wroteך
As I said my development experience is on a different platform with a
fundamentally different design. In that system, process forking is very
expensive and threading is very cheap- the opposite of the *NIX model. And
there are three
On May 8, 2011, at 7:19 PM, guy keren wrote:
when you say system Z - do you refer to what IBM formerly called
MVS?
IBM's had a lot of time to perfect it, their first multiprocessor
machine was delivered in 1969.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM
Occam's Razor does not apply
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 09:47 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2011, Omer Zak wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a bottleneck?:
I suspect that speeding up /usr won't help improve performance that
much. The applications, which seem to be sluggish, deal with a lot of
user data in /home
[This E-mail message is bottom-posting contrary to my usual custom.]
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 17:26 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 15:29 +0300, Omer Zak wrote:
I have a PC with powerful processor, lots of RAM and SATA hard disk.
Nevertheless I noticed that sometimes
I have a PC with powerful processor, lots of RAM and SATA hard disk.
Nevertheless I noticed that sometimes applications (evolution E-mail
software and Firefox[iceweasel] Web browser) have the sluggish feel of a
busy system (command line response time remains crisp, however, because
the processor
you are stepping into never-never land ;)
iostat -x -k 1 is your friend - just make sure you open a very wide
terminal in which to look at it.
disks are notoriously slow, regardless of error cases. it is enough if
an applications perform a lot of random I/O - to make them work very
slow.
i'd
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
you are stepping into never-never land ;)
iostat -x -k 1 is your friend - just make sure you open a very wide
terminal in which to look at it.
disks are notoriously slow, regardless of error cases. it is enough if
an
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 16:19 +0300, Dima (Dan) Yasny wrote:
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
you are stepping into never-never land ;)
iostat -x -k 1 is your friend - just make sure you open a very wide
terminal in which to look at it.
disks are
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:41 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 16:19 +0300, Dima (Dan) Yasny wrote:
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
you are stepping into never-never land ;)
iostat -x -k 1 is your friend - just make sure you
I would suggest making the check I mention in my own blog, in particular
if you're running an old kernel. There has been a bug in the way the
kernel handles heavy disk loads.
http://billauer.co.il/blog/2010/10/disk-io-scheduler-load-dd-freeze-stall-hang/
Omer Zak wrote:
I have a PC with
Hi Omer,
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Omer Zak w...@zak.co.il wrote:
I have a PC with powerful processor, lots of RAM and SATA hard disk.
Nevertheless I noticed that sometimes applications (evolution E-mail
software and Firefox[iceweasel] Web browser) have the sluggish feel of a
busy
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
if you eventually decide that it is indeed disk I/O that slows you down,
and if you have a lot of money to spend - you could consider buying an
enterprise-grade SSD (e.g. from fusion I/O or from OCZ - although for
your
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 21:49 +0300, Elazar Leibovich wrote:
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
if you eventually decide that it is indeed disk I/O that slows
you down,
and if you have a lot of money to spend - you could consider
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 21:49 +0300, Elazar Leibovich wrote:
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
if you eventually decide that it is indeed disk I/O that slows
you down,
and if you have a lot of money to spend - you could consider
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 12:20 AM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
are you talking about using a low-end SSD?
I'm actually not a big SSD expert, but I'm talking about relatively cheap
SSD you can find in Ivory/Ksp, for instance Intel's
http://www.zap.co.il/model.aspx?modelid=751136
the
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 00:21 +0300, Elazar Leibovich wrote:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 12:20 AM, guy keren c...@actcom.co.il wrote:
are you talking about using a low-end SSD?
I'm actually not a big SSD expert, but I'm talking about relatively
cheap SSD you can
On Sat, May 07, 2011, guy keren wrote about Re: Disk I/O as a bottleneck?:
and if you have a lot of money to spend - you could consider buying an
enterprise-grade SSD (e.g. from fusion I/O or from OCZ - although for
your use-case, some of the cheaper SSDs will do) and use it instead
On Sun, 08 May 2011 07:28:49 +0300
Nadav Har'El n...@math.technion.ac.il wrote:
Instead of buying a huge SSD for thousands of dollars another option you
might consider is to buy a relatively small SSD with just enough space to
hold your / partition and swap space. Even 20 G may be enough.
The
On May 8, 2011, at 7:54 AM, is...@zahav.net.il wrote:
I don't agree with this setup. Regular consumer drives setup with
RAID to
stripe are going to be much, much faster and have less problems in
the long
run than single SSDs at this point as well as being a better value
until
prices
51 matches
Mail list logo
