Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?

• Next message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: swsusp: move resume before mounting root [diff against vanilla 2.4.9]"
• Previous message: Pete Zaitcev: "Re: idetape broke in 2.4.x-2.4.9-ac5 (write OK but not read) ide-scsi works in 2.4.4"
• In reply to: Thomas Hood: "2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Next in thread: bill davidsen: "Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Reply: bill davidsen: "Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Reply: Mike Fedyk: "Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Thomas Hood wrote:

> Either 2.4.9-ac16 has much improved VM performance over
> previous 2.4 kernels (under moderate load, at least), or someone
> sneaked in to my apartment last night and upgraded my machine
> while I was asleep. I'm leaning toward the latter explanation.

Now that the -ac VM was stable for a few weeks, I thought
it might be time to sneak in some big performance changes,
finally.

They seem to work ;)

cheers,

Rik

-- 
IA64: a worthy successor to i860.
http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/
Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Albert D. Cahalan: "Re: swsusp: move resume before mounting root [diff against vanilla 2.4.9]"
• Previous message: Pete Zaitcev: "Re: idetape broke in 2.4.x-2.4.9-ac5 (write OK but not read) ide-scsi works in 2.4.4"
• In reply to: Thomas Hood: "2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Next in thread: bill davidsen: "Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Reply: bill davidsen: "Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Reply: Mike Fedyk: "Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 30 2001 - 21:01:00 EST