1 |
Beso pisze: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> |
4 |
> 2008/2/13, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net <mailto:1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>>: |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de |
7 |
> <mailto:volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de>> posted |
8 |
> 200802131346.26316.volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de |
9 |
> <mailto:200802131346.26316.volker.armin.hemmann@××××××××××××.de>, |
10 |
> excerpted below, |
11 |
> on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:46:26 +0100: |
12 |
> |
13 |
> > On Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2008, Duncan wrote: |
14 |
> >>>removed lots of irrelevant 'my hardware is so cool' stuff'. |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > You forget some (little) things. Not everything can be swapped |
17 |
> out. Swap |
18 |
> > is extremly slow AND it is much worse to swapout/swapin programm |
19 |
> code |
20 |
> > that should be run, instead of fetching some files from disk |
21 |
> while the |
22 |
> > programm runs. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> It's not always much worse, because as I explained, in my case, |
25 |
> swap is 4- |
26 |
> way striped while most of the main system is only two-way |
27 |
> striped. Thus, |
28 |
> that "irrelevant" stuff is relevant after all, because it alters the |
29 |
> conditions of the case in debate, because swap reads in at ~2x the |
30 |
> speed |
31 |
> of most data read off disk including apps (which is itself ~2x what a |
32 |
> single-disk system might reasonably expect). |
33 |
> |
34 |
> I've a feeling not appreciating this, not appreciating that your |
35 |
> "test" |
36 |
> case example of compiling with 2 gigs RAM vs only 1 has little to |
37 |
> do with |
38 |
> what might occur with PORTAGE_TMPDIR on tmpfs vs on disk, and not |
39 |
> appreciating the point RF and I are both trying to make, is due to the |
40 |
> same logic flaw. |
41 |
> |
42 |
> |
43 |
> well, for now, the fact for me are: |
44 |
> 1. no ram upgrade is good -> notebook ram costs much more than desktop |
45 |
> one and the notebook itself has a limit |
46 |
> 2. small packages, that have much update during the single days of the |
47 |
> week (i do sync once a day) get compiled at least 2-3 times faster |
48 |
> than normal compilation into disk space |
49 |
> 3. big packages that usually compile in 30-40 mins now compile in |
50 |
> about 10minutes or so faster. to see how it feels to use tmpfs for |
51 |
> compilation i have to upgrade kde. usually kde3 would build into 2 |
52 |
> days of about 13 hours compilation time each. i'll have to see how |
53 |
> fast would kde4 build. |
54 |
> 4. the sync now takes less than 2mins while normally it would take |
55 |
> about 10mins. |
56 |
> i'll try out duncan's speedups for shm and but for the dev one i don't |
57 |
> use baselayout 2 and i'm still with the 1st version, since i don't |
58 |
> feel like upgrading to it yet. but i'd like to know some more about |
59 |
> what are the improvements of the second version. |
60 |
> 5. as for the raid stuff i cannot do it since i've only got one disk. |
61 |
> i'll try to see what happens with swap set to 100. |
62 |
> 6. if i use some other programs while compiling into tmpfs bigones i |
63 |
> need to nice the process or i'll get some misbehaviour from the other |
64 |
> programs. |
65 |
> |
66 |
> -- |
67 |
> dott. ing. beso |
68 |
yeah! Notebooks limit's... My notebook have EM64T extension so it's 36 |
69 |
bit physical and 48 bit virtual address space for memory mappings - that |
70 |
means I could insert more than 2 GB of memory ;). My notebook is |
71 |
designed for 4GB.. is this not much? :> Half of my current linux |
72 |
filesystem in memory (including /etc and /usr recursively) :D:D:D:D. |
73 |
Sorry, but those limits are sick for normal usage of normal citizen |
74 |
:D:D:D. I think about, what You said about memory for laptops... I have |
75 |
DDR2 memory and it cost's same as normal DDR2 memory for standard PC - |
76 |
thats how it works in poland - just You need to find right shop ;). |
77 |
|
78 |
Greetings |
79 |
Mateusz M. |
80 |
-- |
81 |
gentoo-amd64@l.g.o mailing list |