From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 30 1:14: 1 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24BCF37B401 for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 01:13:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from pcwin002.win.tue.nl (pcwin002.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.72]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 329C643E6E for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 01:13:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from stijn@pcwin002.win.tue.nl) Received: from pcwin002.win.tue.nl (orb_rules@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pcwin002.win.tue.nl (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g9U9Dvqx095827; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 10:13:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from stijn@pcwin002.win.tue.nl) Received: (from stijn@localhost) by pcwin002.win.tue.nl (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id g9U9Dufo095826; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 10:13:56 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 10:13:56 +0100 From: Stijn Hoop To: Garance A Drosihn Cc: Raymond Kohler , current@freebsd.org Subject: speed of -CURRENT [was: questions about the state of current] Message-ID: <20021030091356.GC94770@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> References: <2570443.1035916854787.JavaMail.wshttp@emss03g01.ems.lmco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="hOcCNbCCxyk/YU74" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Bright-Idea: Let's abolish HTML mail! Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --hOcCNbCCxyk/YU74 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [picking a random message to reply to] On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 03:12:50PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 11:40 AM -0700 10/29/02, Raymond Kohler wrote: > >1) How is the speed compared to stable? I remember it being just > >too slow some months ago and was wondering how it was improving. >=20 > Seems OK to me. Note that it's using a newer version of gcc, and > that definitely takes longer than the 2.92 version on -stable. So, > if you do a lot of compiling then -current will definitely be slower > for you. I am experiencing a really noticable slower startup time on my very recent -CURRENT laptop for almost all programs. The problem seems to be in getting info in the cache, because it disappears when I start the same program agai= n. It is even noticable when doing a simple 'ls -l' in an uncached directory (= ie boot the laptop, cd tmp/test && ls -l), but larger things, like starting X, take roughly two or three times as long as on -STABLE. Note that this is all 'gut feeling'. I do not (yet) have hard numbers, but = I'm willing to provide some info if people tell me how (is a simple 'time' sufficient? in what environment?). I have INVARIANTS & WITNESS disabled in -CURRENT, and an /etc/mallof.conf pointing to 'aj'. unames: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT #1: Tue Oct 29 12:38:07 GMT 2002 stijn@pounce.sandc= at.nl:/usr/obj/local/src/CURRENT/src/sys/POUNCE=20 FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE #0: Thu Aug 29 13:20:36 CEST 2002 stijn@nbwin209.win= .tue.nl:/local/src/obj/local/src/STABLE/src/sys/NBWIN209=20 The systems hostname was changed between Aug & Oct, but it's the same laptop, a P3-800 w/256MB memory. Thoughts? --Stijn --=20 "Linux has many different distributions, meaning that you can probably find one that is exactly what you want (I even found one that looked like a Unix system)." -- Mike Meyer, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, in message <15252.28617.61423.224978@guru.mired.org> --hOcCNbCCxyk/YU74 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9v6LUY3r/tLQmfWcRAudGAJ93qx2pCCNdNAaLuMRSQjNxmYzPJwCfQBUY wlZintGrrvEIYABVTf8Y1Gc= =K+00 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --hOcCNbCCxyk/YU74-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message