From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 09:48:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 09:48:36 -0400 Received: from A76d9.pppool.de ([213.6.118.217]:39690 "HELO Nicole.muc.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 09:48:24 -0400 Subject: Re: the Gimp and pre11 From: Daniel Egger To: Ed Tomlinson Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20010919034412.092EB9CF9@oscar.casa.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20010919034412.092EB9CF9@oscar.casa.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/0.13 (Preview Release) Date: 19 Sep 2001 15:48:57 +0200 Message-Id: <1000907347.6897.8.camel@sonja> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mit, 2001-09-19 at 05:44, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > I am editing 6 Megapixel files (2800x2048) and things like rotations seem to > have delays that were not happening with previous kernels. My box has 320M. > Seems that pre11 does not swap out as much as pre10 so Gimp has less to work > with. Since GIMP uses it's own memory management using a tile approach I hardly doubt this is caused by swap usage if you defined the maximum amount of memory GIMP should use correctly; though it may be that the kernel swaps out tiles that the tilemanager considers to be active (and thus in memory) this behaviour should not happen as long as the kernel is not to eagerly swapping out memory and considering that the tiles are referenced quite often it should not swap them to disc at all IF the recently introduced algorithms work correctly. Anyhow, just to make sure, would you please mention much memory you assigned to GIMP and what else is running on the system? -- Servus, Daniel