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
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 it
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
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
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 Fri, May 6, 2011 at 17:08, Shachar Shemesh shac...@shemesh.biz wrote:
What is NB?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nota_bene
Gratias tibi ago!
--
Dotan Cohen
http://gibberish.co.il
http://what-is-what.com
___
Linux-il mailing list
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 wroteŚ
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
Hi list,
I have a nokia n800.
If any is interested I will sell it to the best bidder.
The starting price for the device is 500 shekels.
thanks,
Meir
___
Linux-il mailing list
Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il
apt-get update hangs at
Setting up xulrunner-1.9.1
I can kill this, but then I can't finish the update because it says that
dpkg was interrupted. Trying to let dpkg repair with
sudo dpkg --configure -a
hangs setting up xulrunner so I'm stuck.
Any ideas?
--
Michael Shiloh
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 17:04 -0700, Michael Shiloh wrote:
apt-get update hangs at
Setting up xulrunner-1.9.1
I can kill this, but then I can't finish the update because it says that
dpkg was interrupted. Trying to let dpkg repair with
sudo dpkg --configure -a
hangs
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
On 05/08/2011 08:10 PM, guy keren wrote:
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 17:04 -0700, Michael Shiloh wrote:
apt-get update hangs at
Setting up xulrunner-1.9.1
I can kill this, but then I can't finish the update because it says that
dpkg was interrupted. Trying to let dpkg repair with
try to look back at the file, and see if this futex (0xb775e890) was
acquired earlier in the strace output, and not released. these futexes
are used to implement pthread mutexes, and if a an application attempts
to lock the same mutex twice - it will deadlock - and you'll see it
blocked on the
35 matches
Mail list logo
