guy keren wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I have a (couple of) client(s) that have performance problems across
linux distirbutions. That is - they try an operation on a given platform
with a given (redhat both cases) distribution, and get a certain
performance. Then they try
Alon Weinstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And another question, for the uninitiated (that's me) -- when I try to
output $LD_LIBRARY_PATH I get nothing. How can I find out what are the
default libraries used by the system?
cat /etc/ld.so.conf
See also
man 8 ldconfig
man 8 ld.so
--
Oleg
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 09:21:27AM +0200, Alon Weinstein wrote:
That's a very interesting thread I'm wondering -- would I gain a
performance boost by making my RH9 always use /lib/i686 instead of
/lib/tls?
Possibly, due to a bug in RH 9's NPTL implementation, IIRC.
And another
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 09:21:27AM +0200, Alon Weinstein wrote:
[snip]
And another question, for the uninitiated (that's me) -- when I try to
output $LD_LIBRARY_PATH I get nothing. How can I find out what are the
default libraries used by the system?
RTFM - man ld.so .
Basically
Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 09:21:27AM +0200, Alon Weinstein wrote:
cat /etc/ld.so.conf, assuming it hasn't been changed since the last
time someone ran ldconfig.
Looking at /etc/ld.so.conf:
/usr/kerberos/lib
/usr/X11R6/lib
/usr/lib/qt-3.1/lib
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003, Alon Weinstein wrote about Re: Various performance problems:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg30749.html
(summary - nadav harel, checks why hspell on redhat 9 runs several times
slower then on redhat 7.something, and finds that changing
guy keren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
people have such short memories:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg30749.html
From memory (thanks for reminding, Guy), someone (Mulix?) found this
(I just found it on my own, but it does ring a bell)
http://kerneltrap.org/comment/reply/1574
Perhaps you can try
http://www.linuxtested.com/linux_tools.html
-EK
- Original Message -
From: Oleg Goldshmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: Various performance problems
Oleg Goldshmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On 16 Dec 2003, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
guy keren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
people have such short memories:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg30749.html
From memory (thanks for reminding, Guy), someone (Mulix?) found this
(I just found it on my own, but it does ring a
On 16 Dec 2003, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
Oleg Goldshmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://kerneltrap.org/comment/reply/1574
Note that Ulrich Drepper says there that Fedora Core 1 and RHEL3
should not have the problem. Shachar says that RHAS3 is slow -
question is, whether or not that
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Aaron wrote:
I in fact noticed in RH 9.0 hspell and aspell were locking up my system.
I was running a lowlatency kernel but found that jack and ardour were
slow.
I am now running Fedora, in kde and gnome window minimize slowly and
maximize slowly. Programs lockup and
guy keren wrote:
did you _read_ the mentioned post(s)? they give you a direction regarding
what to try doing.
try running the problematic program using:
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 program parameters...
read the posts for the exact command - i might be typing it wrong here,
and i have no RH9 to test
guy keren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
that's not what he was writing. he said that the benchmark should be
perfrmed on one of those systems. he didn't say these systems contained
the NPTL code from CVS head. get yourself one of those systems, and
test.
Sorry, misattributed. Linus did test
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 11:42:49AM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote:
I'm guessing that TLS (thread local storage, NOT transport layer
security)
Is there any work to remove this name clash?
--
If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange apples then
you and I will still each
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003, Shaul Karl wrote about Re: Various performance problems:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 11:42:49AM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote:
I'm guessing that TLS (thread local storage, NOT transport layer
security)
Is there any work to remove this name clash?
Yes, the Thread
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
guy keren wrote:
did you _read_ the mentioned post(s)? they give you a direction regarding
what to try doing.
try running the problematic program using:
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 program parameters...
read the posts for the exact
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
guy keren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
that's not what he was writing. he said that the benchmark should be
perfrmed on one of those systems. he didn't say these systems contained
the NPTL code from CVS head. get yourself one of those systems, and
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Alon Weinstein wrote:
Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 09:21:27AM +0200, Alon Weinstein wrote:
cat /etc/ld.so.conf, assuming it hasn't been changed since the last
time someone ran ldconfig.
Looking at /etc/ld.so.conf:
/usr/kerberos/lib
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:23:45AM +0200, guy keren wrote:
you will need to set the 'LD_ASSUME_KERNEL' variable very early during
system boot - that will make _most_ processes launched with the non-tls
libraries. however, the 'init' process, is launched before any of the
system's
Hi list,
I have a (couple of) client(s) that have performance problems across
linux distirbutions. That is - they try an operation on a given platform
with a given (redhat both cases) distribution, and get a certain
performance. Then they try the same operation on the same hardware with
a
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
b. Occasionally, I get a system thatresponds slow, but aside from a
high load average, there seems to be nothing wrong with it. CPU is idle
most of the time, etc. Any ideas how I can find out what and why is
going on?
I'd look for:
- I/O bound
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 06:39:35PM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Hi list,
Hi Shachar, good questions! I'm curious what others will answer. Here
are some comments from me.
In one case, the fast distro is RedHat 7.2, and the slow one is 9. In
another I'm not sure what the fast one is, but the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This is not the 1st time that I hear that RedHat9 is slower than
earlier ver.
I think that I read somewhere that the DMA of the HD is turned off in
RedHat9, but maybe i'm just fantasyzing.
I tried googling a little (but i don't have a lot of time right
Shachar Shemesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip]
The questions:
a. Does anyone have a recommended benchmarking tool? I found this page
(http://lbs.sourceforge.net/), but I'd really rather not start messing
around with each and every one of those until I find
Shachar Shemesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
a. Does anyone have a recommended benchmarking tool? I found this page
(http://lbs.sourceforge.net/), but I'd really rather not start messing
around with each and every one of those until I find the one I
like. If anyone here has prior experience, I'd
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I have a (couple of) client(s) that have performance problems across
linux distirbutions. That is - they try an operation on a given platform
with a given (redhat both cases) distribution, and get a certain
performance. Then they try the same
I must say, from my own experience with RH9, it is actually
much faster than my old distro (7.3). My educated guess is as
good as any but it doesn't *feel* like a kernel problem (hehe,
yes I am a Zen master :). I might be tempted to look into the
standard C library or any other general component
I in fact noticed in RH 9.0 hspell and aspell were locking up my system.
I was running a lowlatency kernel but found that jack and ardour were
slow.
I am now running Fedora, in kde and gnome window minimize slowly and
maximize slowly. Programs lock up and apt-get takes over to the point
where my
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 01:47:12AM +0200, Aaron wrote:
I in fact noticed in RH 9.0 hspell and aspell were locking up my system.
I was running a lowlatency kernel but found that jack and ardour were
slow.
I am now running Fedora, in kde and gnome window minimize slowly and
maximize slowly.
This is what I used.
/sbin/hdparm -c 3 -d 1 -m 16 -A1 /dev/hda
Aaron
you ever sleep?
Aa
hdparm -v /dev/hda
Or more specifically:
hdparm -d /dev/hda
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word
30 matches
Mail list logo
