Re: Linux 2.4.17 vs 2.2.19 vs rml new VM

[J Sloan <jjs@lexus.com>]

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.
>