Re: Linux 2.6.6 appears to be 3 to 4 times slower than 2.6.5.

["Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz@hotmail.com>]

Sorry to all, it turns out (in two separate cases I had two different 
problems that affected the results).

Case 1: No SMP turned on for CPU w/HT after fix (~4.78 seconds compile time 
(2.6GHZ w/HT))
Case 2: Box had 4GB of NON-ECC memory in it, only recognized 2.56GB, took 
out (2) 1GB DDR DIMM's, and the speed returned what it should be. (~4.3 
seconds compile time (3.0GHZ w/HT))

The control box was a 2.53GHZ (533MHZ BUS w/NO HT) = ~5.3seconds

I have not tested 2.6.6 recently, but in one of my tests I believe it worked 
OK, ever since 2.6.6 removed my /etc/lilo.conf and /etc/mtab and several 
other files, I do not wish to touch that kernel with a 10 foot poll :-P due 
to the IDE disk flush/cache issue.

>From: Duncan Sands <baldrick@free.fr>
>To: gene.heskett@verizon.net, "Justin Piszcz" <jpiszcz@hotmail.com>
>CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.6 appears to be 3 to 4 times slower than 2.6.5.
>Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 10:07:17 +0200
>
> > I noted that my epson C82 usb printer was running about 25% of its
> > normal speed last night, it took gimp-print several hours to do half
> > a dozen 8x10's in 720dpi.  gkrellm's display looks normal though,
> > with setiathome currently taking 90+% of the cpu, which is normal.
>
>2.6.6 or 2.6.6 plus patches from BK or -mm?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Duncan.

_________________________________________________________________
Best Restaurant Giveaway Ever! Vote for your favorites for a chance to win 
$1 million! http://local.msn.com/special/giveaway.asp