From: | Peter Humphrey <peter@××××××××××××××.org> | ||
---|---|---|---|
To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? | ||
Date: | Wed, 01 Dec 2010 12:29:05 | ||
Message-Id: | 201012011227.01651.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org | ||
In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? by Peter Humphrey |
1 | On Monday 29 November 2010 10:58:10 I wrote: |
2 | |
3 | > ... it'll be tomorrow before I have any emerging to do ... |
4 | |
5 | Well, what strange results. Desktop responsiveness is drastically |
6 | improved. On the other hand: |
7 | |
8 | $ time (sudo emerge --sync) |
9 | [...] |
10 | real 10m3.185s |
11 | user 0m6.331s |
12 | sys 0m0.575s |
13 | |
14 | This is with a Gentoo rsync server on the same LAN segment. A P4 box on |
15 | the same segment recorded about 65s for the same command - nearly 10 |
16 | times as fast. |
17 | |
18 | On this box, calculating dependencies took about another 10 minutes, |
19 | though I couldn't time it accurately because it's only part of a |
20 | process. I was watching gkrellm and its display of CPU load while |
21 | simultaneously running four instances of BOINC clients (one per core) at |
22 | large niceness levels, and in the graphs I couldn't see any sign that |
23 | emerge was running at all. |
24 | |
25 | -- |
26 | Rgds |
27 | Peter. Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23. |
Subject | Author |
---|---|
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? | Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> |
[gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? | Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de> |
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? | Stroller <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk> |
[gentoo-user] Re: Best way to improve interactivity with heavy disk activity? | Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de> |