On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:21:34 +0000, Christopher Brown wrote: > On 12/02/2008, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt.tmp0701.nospam@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 14:41:53 +0000, Christopher Brown wrote: > > > > > > It has begun some weeks ago in rawhide and is the same in F9 Alpha, > > > > which I installed from jigdo CD images. > > > > > > > > The entire system is slow whatever it does. Loadavg jumps up > > > > quickly. When running a simple yum update, loadavg goes above 6. User > > > > processes don't seem to get as much cpu power as would be possible. > > > > Windows take seconds to open. The GNOME Desktop is not as responsive > > > > as in F8 either. Opening dialogs, clicking buttons, there seems to be > > > > a penalty on everything. It's unbearable. Testing rawhide or F9 is no > > > > fun at all. Why is this? I remember that during Fedora Core test > > > > releases various kernel debugging features are enabled. Is this the > > > > reason also this time? Has it become much more cpu power hungry than > > > > e.g. with FC7 and older? > > > > > > >From the wiki: > > > > > > In Rawhide/devel kernels (and in -debug flavors of released kernels), > > > Fedora uses the SLUB allocator with full slab debugging enabled by > > > default. The debugging might cause problems in some rare cases: memory > > > allocations can fail, causing the system to panic. Slab debugging can > > > be disabled with the option slub_debug=- (a single minus sign.) Note, > > > that this option will hide an actual bug that really should be > > > reported and fixed rather than worked around. > > > > Doesn't answer the original question, however. > > I believe it does. No. See subject. I asked whether any debug options in the kernel are responsible for the slowdown I experience. You point to a Wiki section that does _not_ mention any significant slowdown. > > Btw, the thread is longer and contains posts with evidence that X is > > the culprit. > > No, you started a new thread Not true. Changing the subject does not start a new thread, because the In-Reply-To/References headers are still intact. > whereas you should've added the info to > this one or indicated the new thread was a child of this one. The headers do that. -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
