| 1 |
On Samstag 05 September 2009, Frank Steinmetzger wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Samstag, 5. September 2009 schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: |
| 3 |
> > > > There are lots of people mentioning interactivity problems on their |
| 4 |
> > > > Linux machines when compared to Windows or OS X. It's not "1 in a |
| 5 |
> > > > thousand". |
| 6 |
> > > |
| 7 |
> > > I second that. My whole system becomes quite unresponsive if I only |
| 8 |
> > > copy a file of a couple of hundred MBs from an external HDD, say a |
| 9 |
> > > video of 600 MB. OK, it's only a relatively slow laptop HDD, but that |
| 10 |
> > > shouldn't happen nonetheless. (Gentoo sources with CFQ as standard IO |
| 11 |
> > > scheduler). |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > retry without forced preemption, with Hz=300 and without noticks. Oh, and |
| 14 |
> > maybe without extX. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> My current values for those are: |
| 17 |
> Preemptive (Low-Latency Desktop) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
and change that to voluntary. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> 1000 Hz timer freq |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
change that to 300 |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Did you mean tickless system with "noticks"? I have this enabled ATM |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
deactivate that. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
if that does not help: |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> And with extX I assume you meant the file systems? I'm aware that ext3 is |
| 32 |
> not very efficient with large files, but I can't/don't want to use ext4 |
| 33 |
> yet because I need to access the partition from windows. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
neither use ext3 nor ext4. |
Archives