Sundara, It is also interesting to note that the system design philosophy of Red Hat has always been to sacrifice performance for stability. At, least that has been my observation when comparing Red Hat to other distros. IE, chose the lowest common denominator amongst hardware settings which is more likely to work on a wider range of machines. From a disto's perspective this is no doubt the safest route. I distincly remember having to tweak hdparm in RH 9 to get better I/O performance out of my disks. These tweaks are not hard to find. It will be very interesting to look at your bookmarks, maybe there is a way of improving performance without sacrificing stability on the wide number of machines running Red Hat and related distros, (Fedora, Tao, White Box, etc) Thanks -----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:fedora-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sundara Pandian Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 1:13 PM To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: General request .. Dismal performance of core 3 .. I will get on working some benchmarks, i am not just saying this out of the air we decided to go with suse . some real world situations like this is noticeable . 1. Working on Open office. StartUp/ working on it . 2. Searching for text in file across a particular directory with same number of files eg : find /backup -name *.dbf | xargs grep somestring 3. Samba Access time it takes to copy on huge folder from Linux server into a windows client (Similar config file) 4. General snappiness of opening applications(this is more of a user oriented benchmark, just try opening nautilus in the 2 oses and then try opening the KDE browser in the 2 oses, prolly a gnome vs kde architecture argument but still ) Quoting Ed Hill <ed@xxxxxxx>: > On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 12:09 -0500, Sundara Pandian wrote: > > All, > > This is a general request to Fedora developers and administrators, > > Pl work on improving the performance of the OS, We were very > > disappointed > in > > the > > core 3 performance, We have core 3 , suse9.1 and redhat es running > > on 3 > seperate > > machines with same hardware. > > Core 3 is almost twice as slow as suse9.1 in terms of performance > > (boot, > > > Hi Sundara, > > Like a lot of Free and Open Source software, Fedora is a *community* > project. So in some very real sense you're much more likely to get > more out of it if you can figure out how to put something useful into > it. > > In that spirit, could you describe which benchmarks you've run and > what the results were? For instance, what basis are you using to > decide that FC3 is "almost twice as slow"? > > If you'd really like to see this issue addressed, then you should > create a *reproducible* benchmark that measures the things you care > about and then work with people to figure out how to improve > performance on that benchmark. > > Ed > > -- > Edward H. Hill III, PhD > office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave. > Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 > emails: eh3@xxxxxxx ed@xxxxxxx > URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/ > phone: 617-253-0098 > fax: 617-253-4464 > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > ================== #!/usr/bin/perl ================== Sundara Pandian ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
