Re: Interactive Usage of 2.6.0.test1 worse than 2.4.21

Andrew Morton
2003-08-05T23:34:30Z

Peter Chubb <peter@chubb.wattle.id.au> wrote:
>
> >> when using 2.6.0.test1 on a high end laptop (P-IV 2.2 GHz, 1GB RAM)
> >> I notice very significant slowdown in interactive usage compared to
> >> 2.4.21.
> >>
> >> The difference is most easily seen when switching folders in
> >> kmail. While 2.4.21 is instantaneous 2.6.0.test1 shows the clock
> >> for about 2-3 seconds.
> >>
>
> I see the same problem, and I'm using XFS. Booting with
> elevator=deadline fixed it for me. The anticipatory scheduler hurts
> if you have a disc optimised for low power consumption, not speed.

Do you have a specific set of steps with which to reproduce this?