Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 02 Jan 2002 11:07:35 -0800 | From | J Sloan <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.17 vs 2.2.19 vs rml new VM |
| |
Just .02 from the peanut gallery -
It would be interesting if you were to compare and contrast 2.4.17-preempt with 2.4.17-low-latency.
I find the low latency patch makes a noticeable difference in e.g. q3a and rtcw - OTOH I have not been able to discern any tangible difference from the stock kernel when using -preempt.
cu
jjs
brian@worldcontrol.com wrote:
>I'd like to say that as of 2.4.17 w/preempt patch, the linux kernel >seems again to perform as well as 2.2.19 for interactive use and >reliability, at least in my use. > >2.4.17 still croaks running some of the giant memory applications >that I run successfully on 2.2.19. (Machines with 2GB of RAM >running 3GB+ apps.) > >I tried rmap-10 new VM and under my typical load my desktop machine >froze repeatedly. Seemed the memory pool was going down the drain >before the freeze. Meaning apps were failing and getting stuck in >various odd states. > >No doubt, preempt and rmap-10 are incompatible, but I'm not going to >give up the preempt patch any time soon. > >All in all 2.4.17 w/preempt is very satisfactory. >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |