From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Aug  5 16:40:57 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from fellspt.charm.net (fellspt.charm.net [199.0.70.29])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C6C81559F
	for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu,  5 Aug 1999 16:40:52 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dutch@charm.net)
Received: from charm.net (coretel-116-130.charm.net [209.143.116.130])
	by fellspt.charm.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA21213;
	Thu, 5 Aug 1999 19:38:36 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <37AA2056.CE1F9239@charm.net>
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 19:37:58 -0400
From: Dutch Collins <dutch@charm.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.2-RELEASE i386)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Chris Fedde <cfedde@fedde.littleton.co.us>
Cc: Evren Yurtesen <yurtesen@ispro.net.tr>,
	freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: X under FreeBSD and Linux
References: <199908051846.MAA93853@fedde.littleton.co.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Chris Fedde wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> My comments are mixed in below...
> 
> Evren Yurtesen writes:
>     Hello,
> 
>     I have a p200MMX with 24MB RAM and S3 Virge 2MB graphics adapter.
>     I use both FreeBSD and Windows on the same machine.
> 
>     But as far as I have found out Windows is working far faster than
>     FreeBSD.
> 
>     For example I run Netscape on Windows and FreeBSD (even the same
>     version)
>     and FreeBSD is getting frozen for a while and using hard drive so much
>     (possible swapping?) and after it everything is working slowly, and even
> 
> With netscape running start  "vmstat 5" in a separate terminal window.
> When "FreeBSD is getting frozen" do you see much activity?  That can
> indicate a memory shortage.
> 
>     [...]
>     One of my friend told me that his Redhat Linux was working far faster
>     than Windows in his machine. Can this be true?
> 
> Sure. Unix systems work best when there is enough core memory for
> all active processes and their data.  If you are seeing lots activity
> in vmstat as you use your system then I'd say you are short of
> memory.  Using "ps -auxww | less" and looking at the RSS column I
> calculate that my Xserver is using 18Meg and Netscape is using
> 13Meg or 31Meg.  If this was your case then your system will page
> every time netscape wants to draw something on the window.
> 
> Get as much memory as you can afford.  If you have to choose get
> lots of slow cheep memory rather than a small amount of fast
> memory.
> 
>     by the way what can be wrong with my computer?
> 
> The linux vs. windows vs. freebsd argument is a red herring.  Both
> Linux and FreeBSD will have poor performance when they are starved
> for memory.  Windows is performing better in your case because
> netscape esentially has the whole computer to itself when it is
> up.
> 
>     Evren Yurtesen
>     yurtesen@ispro.net.tr
> __
> Chris Fedde       <cfedde@fedde.littleton.co.us>
> 303 773 9134
> 

On may 486 at 100Mz, 32Mb, KDE+netscape == Win98+netscape. However, I like
to crunch seti numbers, oops, netscape page faults like a M*^^%*. I need an
article, reference book, something, about load balancing. Maybe I can find
some RAM under the table but I don't think so. Icky stuff for me. Never had
to run the VMS system I was on.

-d


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message