Hi, 

my 2 euro cents of comment:

>> I was trying to compile the Kernel and it was crawling to ..
> Be prepared that kernel compiles will take several hours on this 
machine.
> It's close to an hour on my dual SM71-SS20 with 256MB - with a SMALL 
kernel

Affirmative, a compilation of a full SuSE-config'd kernel takes about 6..8 
hours
on SS LX with 64MB RAM

About running KDE: I run KDE - it's a bit slow, but not painfully - on a 
SS 5 with 
_96_ MB RAM, on 64MB machines (otther SS5 and LX) it's just not quite 
usable; so on 
32MB machine go with the alternative window managers others on this list 
have mentioned.

Thomas






"Ingo T. Storm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10.06.02 23:33

 
        An:     "suse sparc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        Kopie: 
        Thema:  Re: [suse-sparc] trying to compile 2.4.16 kernel on Sparc LX ..


> I was trying to compile the Kernel and it was crawling to ..

Be prepared that kernel compiles will take several hours on this machine.
It's close to an hour on my dual SM71-SS20 with 256MB - with a SMALL 
kernel
with only the modules needed on a firewall. Please don't forget you are
running a beautiful machine - but it has the equivalent horsepower of an
early Pentium. You'll have to go UltraSparc if you want fast kernel 
builds.

> Which utility should I use to really see what is going on with
> memory and swap allocation ? Tried vmstat but that's a bit cryptic to me 
!

[root@e1k root]# vmstat 10 2
   procs                      memory    swap          io     system
cpu
 r  b  w   swpd   free   buff  cache  si  so    bi    bo   in    cs  us sy
id
 0  0  0   2788  14464  23096  15132   0   0     0     0    3     2   0 0
5
 0  0  0   2788  14460  23096  15132   0   0     0     1  103     5   0 0
100

The important columns are:

"procs r" (unning): Number of processes that are ready to run. Shouldn't 
be
over 2 (multiplied by #cpus) for a longer period.

"si/so": swapping in and out. Should be 0 most of the time or you are 
short
of RAM (yes, there are exceptions, but not for regular use).

"cpu us"(er): percentage of time spent running your programs
"cpu sy"(stem): perc. time spent by kernel stuff. Shouldn't be over 10-20%
for extended periods of time, otherwise you probably have an I/O problem.
"cpu id"(le): the obvius. Shouldn't be over 5 percent, or you are wasting
electricity;-)

top isn't bad for a first glance either:

try "top i S" (i to ignore idle processes, so you only see the processes
that actually so s.th., S to show the cumulative time of a process and its
dead children. This is esp. nice to see how much "make" has been doing 
with
all the processes it has spawned).

Sample during a build of wmakerconf on a SparcServer1000 with dual SM61,
64MB, kernel 2.2.x:

 11:26pm  up 5 days,  5:37,  3 users,  load average: 1.04, 0.79, 0.39
41 processes: 39 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU0 states:  0.3% user,  2.2% system,  0.0% nice, 96.4% idle
CPU1 states: 95.1% user,  4.3% system,  0.0% nice,  0.0% idle
Mem:    60352K av,   58968K used,    1384K free,   12700K shrd,   17612K
buff
Swap:  264112K av,    3240K used,  260872K free                   26428K
cached

  PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT LC %CPU %MEM  CTIME COMMAND
 8401 root       3   0  1196 1196   964 R     0  2.9  1.9   0:19 top
10729 root      13   0  7896 7896  1900 R     1 99.2 13.0   0:06 cc1

read: 2CPUs, one at full load (cc1), one 96,4% idle, no memory shortage
(only 3240K swap in use).

Apart from that: Nick's guideline on what NOT to run look pretty good to 
me.
And of course all my figures are estimates from my usage patterns and by 
no
means scientifically based and proven. As usual, YMMV.

Ingo


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to