Hi Maciej Zenczykowski,
> This is happening on a freshly installed RH7.1 notebook.
> Celeron 400 + 64 mb ram, kernel as shipped (2.4.2-2, have not even
> recompiled it yet). I have a 140 mb swap partition set up but at the time
> this happened it was OFF. I was (still am) running X + twm + two
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 06:32:16PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Monday 25 June 2001 18:16, Colonel wrote:
> > Had you tried fvwm-1.24r (the original) ? It was designed long ago to
> > be lean and fast on the desktop. I know it whips KDE.
>
> Yes, I did. It's even faster than xfce but the
On Monday 25 June 2001 18:16, Colonel wrote:
> In clouddancer.list.kernel, you wrote:
> >Further to that, I followed Alan's lead and installed xfce. My laptop,
> > which was really suffering under Gnome with 64 meg (much more so under
> > KDE) is suddenly light on its feet. Not to mention that i
On 25 Jun 2001, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> On 24 Jun 2001 22:36:25 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > recompiled it yet). I have a 140 mb swap partition set up but at the time
> > > this happened it was OFF. I was (still am) running X + twm + two xterms
> > >
> > > top gives me:
> > > mem: 62144k av, 611
In clouddancer.list.kernel, you wrote:
>
>Further to that, I followed Alan's lead and installed xfce. My laptop, which
>was really suffering under Gnome with 64 meg (much more so under KDE) is
>suddenly light on its feet. Not to mention that it built from source in
>under 10 minutes and insta
On Monday 25 June 2001 11:21, Helge Hafting wrote:
> If it still is too slow - add RAM or run fewer/smaller apps.
> Opera is a low-memory alternative to netscape. Avoiding
> gnome/kde apps when plain X apps are available is also a good idea
> when you're short on memory. Using low resolution and
Maciej Zenczykowski wrote:
> Now my question is how can it be
> thrashing with swap explicitly turned off?
Easy. Linux throws executables out from memory because they _can_
be fetched again from disk. Yes - this definitely gives trashing
if you loose almost all your executables this way.
> [o
On 24 Jun 2001 22:36:25 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > recompiled it yet). I have a 140 mb swap partition set up but at the time
> > this happened it was OFF. I was (still am) running X + twm + two xterms
> >
> > top gives me:
> > mem: 62144k av, 61180k used, 956k free, 0k shrd, 76 buff, 2636 cache
> recompiled it yet). I have a 140 mb swap partition set up but at the time
> this happened it was OFF. I was (still am) running X + twm + two xterms
>
> top gives me:
> mem: 62144k av, 61180k used, 956k free, 0k shrd, 76 buff, 2636 cached
> swap: 0k av, 0k used, 0k free [as expected]
Not as e
>Now my question is how can it be
>thrashing with swap explicitly turned off?
Easy. All applications are themselves swap space - the binary is
merely memory-mapped onto the executable file. When the system gets
low on memory, the only thing it can do is purge some binary pages,
and then repe
Hi All,
I have a queer problem.
This is happening on a freshly installed RH7.1 notebook.
Celeron 400 + 64 mb ram, kernel as shipped (2.4.2-2, have not even
recompiled it yet). I have a 140 mb swap partition set up but at the time
this happened it was OFF. I was (still am) running X + twm + two
11 matches
Mail list logo
