LinuxQuestions.org
LinuxAnswers - the LQ Linux tutorial section.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Desktop
User Name
Password
Linux - Desktop This forum is for the discussion of all Linux Software used in a desktop context.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 11-09-2013, 12:29 AM   #16
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 13 , MacPup,Linux-Lite 2.0, SaliX
Posts: 2,844
Blog Entries: 18

Rep: Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912

Quote:
Both KDE and Gnome came with this .iso/install. Could this explain why so much memory is being accessed? What would happen if I unistalled Gnome? I need help here. Is anybody out there?
Running Debian Jessie repos in AntiX 13 with Fluxbox, Icewm, or JWM choices for Desktop on a IBM A22M with 1000hz processor with 512MB of ram. As mentioned earlier by other Members here. Your Gnome and KDE is killing you.
I run Libreoffice just fine. Youtube-Viewer in menu works just fine. xmms plays Music just fine.

http://antix.freeforums.org/download/file.php?id=1264

Look at the cpu and ram usage in Conky with xmms playing music and Window Manager and Conky running.
You just have the wrong install going. By that I mean Desktop environments and things like Music applications. Not the distro.

http://antix.freeforums.org/download/file.php?id=1263

Edit: I am not being critical or disrespectful. I just figure a couple
of pictures is worth a thousand words.

Last edited by rokytnji; 11-09-2013 at 12:40 AM.
 
Old 11-12-2013, 04:59 PM   #17
r00ster
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: boundary beach, bc
Distribution: 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.60-1+deb7u3 i686 GNU/Linux
Posts: 213

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
You just have the wrong install going. By that I mean Desktop environments and things like Music applications. Not the distro.
What can I do about it?
 
Old 11-12-2013, 05:32 PM   #18
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 13 , MacPup,Linux-Lite 2.0, SaliX
Posts: 2,844
Blog Entries: 18

Rep: Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912
Quote:
What can I do about it?
Install a Window manager instead of a Desktop Environment just for starters. https://wiki.debian.org/DesktopEnvironment

A quick question? Did you install Debian from a live iso or a do a Debian Net Install?
 
Old 11-12-2013, 08:49 PM   #19
r00ster
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: boundary beach, bc
Distribution: 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.60-1+deb7u3 i686 GNU/Linux
Posts: 213

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
I did a deb net install
"debian-7.0.0-i386-netinst.iso"
May 26, 2013.

Windows Managers is a new concept to me. I used KDE for Etch, Lenny and Squeeze. It worked great with Etch. Why won't it work for the rest?
 
Old 11-12-2013, 09:41 PM   #20
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,648
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095
Because newer versions of KDE (Etch and Lenny had KDE 3, Squeeze and Wheezy KDE 4) need more resources (especially RAM). KDE is simply not aimed at low-spec machines (nowadays even very cheap machines come with at least 2GB, but most likely 4GB of RAM).
 
Old 11-13-2013, 11:15 AM   #21
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 13 , MacPup,Linux-Lite 2.0, SaliX
Posts: 2,844
Blog Entries: 18

Rep: Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912Reputation: 912
My low ram in my screenshots is because I am running a Window Manager like Icewm. When I log into fluxbox. The ram usage goes down further.

Quote:
I use Dolphin to manage files
I use spacefm or rox-filer which is lighter on ram usage. I use xmms (screenshot link) instead of a heavy duty music player.
I use gnome-mplayer instead of vlc or gxine for a all purpose media player. All these comprimises I live with because of processor
speed limitations and ram limitations. Since you are familiar with a Debian Net install.

http://minimallinux.blogspot.com/201...l-install.html

It's for squeeze but should be OK for a general reference for wheezy. Or. Bite the bullet and go with a AntiX 13.2 install instead and no configuring needed. You can pick which Debian repos you wanna run before proceeding with the install.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...4/#post5058810

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIN3AL03_Yc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kCo...8DDQkBJ5YSfVrt

As always. These are just suggestions/advise. Do what suits you best. Good Luck with it.
 
Old 11-13-2013, 05:34 PM   #22
r00ster
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: boundary beach, bc
Distribution: 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.60-1+deb7u3 i686 GNU/Linux
Posts: 213

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
TobiSGD & rokytnji;

Very helpful. I did not understand that 2.66 Ghz was slow by today's tech standards. Neither did I know system requirements for deb distros, esp. RAM, had scaled up by several orders of magnitude.

As testimony to my naiveté, being able to run W-XP with all the bells & whistles, but not being able to run Squeeze and Wheezy just didn't make sense to me. Forgive me if this sounds provocative, but my take-away at this point is that deb6 & deb7 are more demanding (bloated?) than Windows. Y'all can imagine my disappointment. I've been steadfastly proselytizing on behalf of Linux based on the Etch era testimonials and personal experience that Linux was less demanding on system resources, and much less vulnerable to exploitation, than MS distros.

TobiSGD wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD
KDE is simply not aimed at low-spec machines (nowadays even very cheap machines come with at least 2GB, but most likely 4GB of RAM).
My machine, eMachines T2893, is expandable by adding 2GB RAM. On-Line search at<http://www.4allmemory.com/memory/gateway-t-series-t2893/>
has:
Quote:
2GB DDR-333 (PC2700) Memory Kit
[4AllMemory guarantees this product to be compatible with your system and deliver the performance you need.]

There are 2 pieces of 1GB RAM in this kit.

Part No: 4346619

$42.93
Arithmetically, that would give me 2.512 MB of memory. If I ordered the Mem Kit, would installing it be something I could/should do? Or should I have a tech store bench it and do the implant? Although I'm fairly competent in analog-era electronic devices, I'm not sure if installing it myself would involve issues I don't understand; ... like booting back in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rokytnji
I use gnome-mplayer instead of vlc or gxine for a all purpose media player. All these comprimises I live with because of processor
speed limitations and ram limitations.
Curious! I do have gnome-mplayer installed. But it doesn't work. I can't play downloaded videos. That is, it plays audio, but not the video. This is a subject for a different thread; I think.
Code:
mplayer -v
MPlayer svn r34540 (Debian), built with gcc-4.7 (C) 2000-2012 MPlayer Team
CPU vendor name: GenuineIntel* max cpuid level: 5
CPU: Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.66GHz (Family: 15, Model: 3, Stepping: 4)
extended cpuid-level: 8
extended cache-info: 16793664
Detected cache-line size is 64 bytes
Testing OS support for SSE... yes.
Tests of OS support for SSE passed.
CPUflags:* MMX: 1 MMX2: 1 3DNow: 0 3DNowExt: 0 SSE: 1 SSE2: 1 SSSE3: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by rokytnji
Since you are familiar with a Debian Net install.
http://minimallinux.blogspot.com/201...l-install.html
The netinst process is, even after working with it for some time, still confusing to me. I'm never sure I'm getting what I think I'm getting. With my current install, I thought it ONLY contained KDE. I was as careful as I knew how to be to ensure that. But I didn't succeed as you now know.

If I were to d/l and burn the following, and perchance replace my partition with Wheezy with it (after doing the backups of course) would that do the trick?
http://www.debian.org/CD/netinst/#netinst-stable
kfreebsd-i386

rod
 
Old 11-13-2013, 11:41 PM   #23
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,648
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095
Quote:
Originally Posted by r00ster View Post
I did not understand that 2.66 Ghz was slow by today's tech standards.
It is not 2.66 GHz per se, but that you have a single core Celeron D CPU which makes the machine slow. Nowadays even netbooks are faster due to newer CPU architecture and dual or even quadcore CPUs.

Quote:
As testimony to my naiveté, being able to run W-XP with all the bells & whistles, but not being able to run Squeeze and Wheezy just didn't make sense to me. Forgive me if this sounds provocative, but my take-away at this point is that deb6 & deb7 are more demanding (bloated?) than Windows. Y'all can imagine my disappointment. I've been steadfastly proselytizing on behalf of Linux based on the Etch era testimonials and personal experience that Linux was less demanding on system resources, and much less vulnerable to exploitation, than MS distros.
Comparing a modern Linux distribution with a Windows OS from 2001 is not fair, you should compare it with Windows 7 or 8, which are still more demanding than Linux systems.
Anyways, the high resource usage is usually not caused by the distro, but by the desktop environment (or window manager) in use. If you compare XFCE with Windows XP, both have approximately the same functionality, you will see that XFCE will use less RAM, if you compare KDE or Gnome 3 with Windows 7 or 8 (also approximately same functionality) the Linux system will less demanding. If you choose which software you use according to your system specs you will get a lightweight and reasonably fast system. For example, when using antiX or Salix LXDE you will get a system will all software the "average user" needs, but more lightweight than a typical XP install.

Quote:
My machine, eMachines T2893, is expandable by adding 2GB RAM. On-Line search at<http://www.4allmemory.com/memory/gateway-t-series-t2893/>
has:
Quote:
2GB DDR-333 (PC2700) Memory Kit
[4AllMemory guarantees this product to be compatible with your system and deliver the performance you need.]

There are 2 pieces of 1GB RAM in this kit.

Part No: 4346619

$42.93
Arithmetically, that would give me 2.512 MB of memory.
Your system supports a maximum of 2GB RAM, so you would have to remove the 512MB module.
Quote:
If I ordered the Mem Kit, would installing it be something I could/should do? Or should I have a tech store bench it and do the implant? Although I'm fairly competent in analog-era electronic devices, I'm not sure if installing it myself would involve issues I don't understand; ... like booting back in.
Upgrading the RAM is nothing more than removing the old module and plug the new modules into their slots. It is an easy task.
Quote:
Curious! I do have gnome-mplayer installed. But it doesn't work. I can't play downloaded videos. That is, it plays audio, but not the video. This is a subject for a different thread; I think.
Indeed, please open a new thread with that issue.
Quote:
If I were to d/l and burn the following, and perchance replace my partition with Wheezy with it (after doing the backups of course) would that do the trick?
http://www.debian.org/CD/netinst/#netinst-stable
kfreebsd-i386
The kfreebsd version features a FreeBSD kernel instead of a Linux kernel. This system is under heavy development and at the moment not thought for the enduser.

The trick with the netinstall CDs is not to install the desktop environment (de-selecting the Desktop task). This will install a basic CLI only system. After the installation you install only the desktop environment and the software you need, this will keep the system small and without bloat. Of course you will have to choose software appropriate to the task, on low-RAM systems you won't have much fun with, for example, Firefox/Iceweasel, a better browser would be Midori in that case.
 
Old 11-15-2013, 07:53 AM   #24
r00ster
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: boundary beach, bc
Distribution: 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.60-1+deb7u3 i686 GNU/Linux
Posts: 213

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Tobi;
Whew! Wonderful tutorial I must say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobi
Anyways, the high resource usage is usually not caused by the distro, but by the desktop environment (or window manager) in use. If you compare XFCE with Windows XP, both have approximately the same functionality, you will see that XFCE will use less RAM, if you compare KDE or Gnome 3 with Windows 7 or 8 (also approximately same functionality) the Linux system will less demanding. If you choose which software you use according to your system specs you will get a lightweight and reasonably fast system. For example, when using antiX or Salix LXDE you will get a system [with] all software the "average user" needs, but more lightweight than a typical XP install.
Assume I opt to buy/install the 2GB module. I've read where adding mem caused boot issues. Can you put my mind at rest about that? I do have the option of booting my Knoppix Live CD if I get in trouble. But I'd prefer to avoid the problem rather than try to fix it later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobi
The trick with the netinstall CDs is not to install the desktop environment (de-selecting the Desktop task). This will install a basic CLI only system. After the installation you install only the desktop environment and the software you need, this will keep the system small and without bloat. Of course you will have to choose software appropriate to the task, on low-RAM systems you won't have much fun with, for example, Firefox/Iceweasel, a better browser would be Midori in that case.
If I backup my Wheezy docs, would it make sense to re-install it in the same partition from the .iso CD? I'm deducing from your very cogent notes that the .iso CD presents the OPTION of installing it without KDE and gnome; but with XFCE' or 'XDE'.

Changing browser... man, I hope the extra RAM would let me keep Iceweasel. I run into problems with gov & banking agencies d/l'ing forms and documents. Here in Canada, they are frustratingly particular.

One last question: since memory is the issue at this point, would you advise increasing the sizes of the spaces allocated to “Swap” and “Mem” ? Swap (sda2) only has 509 MB allocated; apparently.

Code:
# fdisk -l
Disk /dev/sda: 160.0 GB, 160041885696 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 19457 cylinders, total 312581808 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x000a6f7d

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sda1   *          63    19535039     9767488+  83  Linux
/dev/sda2        19535040    20531069      498015   82  Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/sda3        20531070    79120124    29294527+  83  Linux
/dev/sda4        79120186   108422684    14651249+   5  Extended
/dev/sda5        79120188   108422684    14651248+  83  Linux

Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0 GB, 80026361856 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 9729 cylinders, total 156301488 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x04920492

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sdb1   *          63   156296384    78148161    7  HPFS/NTFS/exFAT

rod

Last edited by r00ster; 11-15-2013 at 08:00 AM.
 
Old 11-15-2013, 09:59 AM   #25
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,648
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095Reputation: 4095
Quote:
Originally Posted by r00ster View Post
[B]Assume I opt to buy/install the 2GB module. I've read where adding mem caused boot issues. Can you put my mind at rest about that? I do have the option of booting my Knoppix Live CD if I get in trouble. But I'd prefer to avoid the problem rather than try to fix it later.
I tinker a lot with my machines, even to the point of running a Linux system that was installed on one machine on a completely different machine. I never ran into a problem like that, Linux is extremely flexible when it comes to changing the hardware.

Quote:
If I backup my Wheezy docs, would it make sense to re-install it in the same partition from the .iso CD?
It would be a faster and cleaner solution than to remove unnecessary packages from your system.

Quote:
I'm deducing from your very cogent notes that the .iso CD presents the OPTION of installing it without KDE and gnome; but with XFCE' or 'XDE'.
There are two different functions that can be used. At first, you can choose in the boot menu of the netinst-CD which DE to install (under the menu "Expert Options", IIRC). Choosing XFCE here will give you a desktop installation with XFCE and the applications the Debian developers have chosen for this environment. The other option is to completely ignore the DE for a moment and just to install none (deselect the "Desktop" task when you can choose which tasks should be installed). After the installation is finished you use the package manager to install whichever DE and software you want to use. This leads in general to a smaller and cleaner system and is prefered by many Debian users.

Quote:
Changing browser... man, I hope the extra RAM would let me keep Iceweasel. I run into problems with gov & banking agencies d/l'ing forms and documents. Here in Canada, they are frustratingly particular.
With 2GB of RAM you will have no problems with Iceweasel.

Quote:
One last question: since memory is the issue at this point, would you advise increasing the sizes of the spaces allocated to “Swap” and “Mem” ? Swap (sda2) only has 509 MB allocated; apparently.
512MB of swap is fine, if you don't use the hibernation feature, especially if you upgrade to 2GB of RAM. I would just look at it and if you ever need more swap it is easy to add swap-files to the system. Regarding "Mem", this is your physically installed RAM and will automatically be set to the new value once you installed new RAM.
 
Old 11-16-2013, 11:57 AM   #26
r00ster
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: boundary beach, bc
Distribution: 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.60-1+deb7u3 i686 GNU/Linux
Posts: 213

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Tobi

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobi
It would be a faster and cleaner solution than to remove unnecessary packages from your system
Sounds like a good place to start while I await delivery of the 2GB Mem Module. Both Gnome and KDE packages are installed. As you know, there are hundreds of files for each. Not sure 'what up' with xfce; whether or not it is actually installed or part of gnome. I'm assuming I need to be sure it's accessible/functional before I 'deep-six' KDE & Gnome.
Code:
~$ locate xfce
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-display-settings.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-keyboard-settings.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-mouse-settings.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-session-settings.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-settings-manager.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-ui-settings.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-wm-settings.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-wmtweaks-settings.desktop
/usr/share/app-install/desktop/xfce-workspaces-setting
<SNIP>
WRT removing packages, what would be the correct ~bash entry to 'purge', 'remove' KDE & Gnome? The onliest google references cite Ubuntu, Kubuntu, ArchLinux; not Deb7/Wheezy. Dependencies you know...I don't know which, if any I should retain.
 
Old 11-20-2013, 01:54 PM   #27
rnturn
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Illinois (Chicago area)
Distribution: Red Hat (8.0), SuSE (10.x, 11.x, 12.2, 13.2), Solaris (8-10), Tru64
Posts: 982

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by r00ster View Post
ONE:
I can run W-XP on the legacy Slave Drive with all kinds of stuff running at the same time. E.g., AVG, Scotty WatchDog, GuardDog Firewall, MS Word, Firefox, and the Music Player running through a file.

TWO:
When I installed the new HDD, making it Master, I installed Etch with the same partition configuration I've used for Lenny, Squeeze and now Wheezy. Etch ran like a dream. BUT, Lenny, Squeeze and Wheezy have plagued me with random system freeezes, sluggish scrolling,... I can't even run Amarok for more than a few minutes.
Sort of an apples-to-oranges comparison. I'm not sure of the Debian lineage but I recall that the memory needs of recent versions of OpenSUSE has increased. What I used to be able to do on a 512MB system now seems to need at least 1GB for comfortable use (768MB at a bare minimum). 512MB will work but you're not going to have fun running multiple applications.

Quote:
THREE:
Both KDE and Gnome came with this .iso/install. Could this explain why so much memory is being accessed? What would happen if I unistalled Gnome?
Well... first, you'll lose access to some applications. Even if you're not using Gnome as your desktop, removing Gnome will likely remove libraries that Gnome-based applications need. I run Enlightenment but still wind up having to drag in run time libraries for Gnome or KDE when I fire up gedit or Konsole. (I could get by without KDE if I ran xterms but, for now, I'm hooked on KMail and Korganizer.)

Quote:
I'm contemplating adding 2G of memory. It's available for my unit. But does it really make sense considering its performance with W-XP and Etch? Are we really saying the last 3 Deb distros take more memory and CPU than W-XP?
Adding memory is always going to be a win, even for Windows. Just be aware that your hardware may limit how much you can add. I saw mention of "2GB" in a previous post so you might need to remove the 512MB before you increase the RAM to 2GB. (If your performance problem is solved, you probably won't feel too bad about having 512MB of RAM sitting in the drawer.)

My guess is that it is the Linux applications -- and especially the supporting run time libraries -- that have increased in size. (I can recall when I had to borrow memory just to be able to run the RedHat installer when it started demanding 32MB to run; the installed system itself would run fine with less.) If you're running applications written for both desktops, you have run time libraries from both environments being loaded. Try limiting yourself to applications from only KDE and see if that helps. It may help some but I think adding the RAM will show the biggest improvement. You could stick with Etch but risk not having up-to-date software (securitywise) or even continued support from the Debian team. RAM prices are pretty darned low right now.

In an above post, I recall you mentioning that you were running Amarok. One thing that seems to have helped a performance problem I was having was to disable the Wikipedia option in Amarok. While it was nifty to see information on the artist while a track is playing, turning that off seems to have saved at least 300MB-400MB of RAM while Amarok is running.

Hope this helps a bit...

--
Rick
 
Old 12-03-2013, 12:54 PM   #28
r00ster
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: boundary beach, bc
Distribution: 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.60-1+deb7u3 i686 GNU/Linux
Posts: 213

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Rick:

Very informative to me. Thanks.
I understand that my 2.66 GHz eMachines, T2893 is getting on and, much like its operator, is old, slow and behind the times.

In descending order of priority, and based what what y'all have taught me, the sequence of options I'm considering are as follows.

ONE
a Backup Wheezy Docs & Sets
b Reinstall Wheezy from Inst. CD in LXDE or XFCE (mode?)
to install a basic CLI only system as per posts #5 & #11 above.
c Import Wheezy Docs & Sets from Backup
TWO
Monitor performance as per 14 steps listed in post #5 above.
If performance fails to meet current expectations:

THREE
Replace 512 MB RAM card with 2GB Memory Kit.

If performance is still unsatisfactory:

FOUR
Open new thread about the feasibility of replacing motherboard versus upgrading to a new desktop.
rooster
 
Old 12-03-2013, 03:46 PM   #29
rnturn
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Illinois (Chicago area)
Distribution: Red Hat (8.0), SuSE (10.x, 11.x, 12.2, 13.2), Solaris (8-10), Tru64
Posts: 982

Rep: Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by r00ster View Post
[B][COLOR="DarkSlateBlue"]
I understand that my 2.66 GHz eMachines, T2893 is getting on and, much like its operator, is old, slow and behind the times.
Ha! I'm beginning to suspect that the 200MHz Pentium MMX-based system we're running (with a whopping 128MB) is starting to get old. (It's our firewall so no GUI.)

Quote:
In descending order of priority, and based what what y'all have taught me, the sequence of options I'm considering are as follows.

[snip]
Personally, I'd monitor memory use first in an effort to find out what applications are the biggest hogs. Maybe you can find alternatives that aren't as memory hungry.

Adding more memory would be my next move. If you were to find that one of your heavily used applications is having memory leak problems adding more memory will only forestall the performance problem for so long. Eventually, even the added memory will get eaten up. One thing to consider is to make sure all of the applications are up to the latest patch levels. You may find that memory leak problems have been addressed.

Reinstalling may not be necessary. Couldn't you just get ruthless and remove packages that you think are causing your poor performance? They can be added back in if you need them later.

Replacing the motherboard would be my last resort. Some people seem to have an easy go of it but I've had mixed luck making hardware changes to a working system (it was a quite some time ago, though) and replacing the motherboard is about as extreme of a hardware change as one can make. I'm not familiar with the guts of the EMachines systems. Hopefully, their motherboards are standard sizes; some commercial systems use oddball motherboards. If your system is one of those oddballs, a barebones systems from Fry's/Tiger/etc. might be an easier move. There are too many options to doing something like this, though. Could be a new thread all by itself.

Before an OS reinstallation or wholesale hardware replacement, if you haven't done it yet, I would move all of my data onto a second (or third, etc... depends on how many open drives bays you have on hand) disk in order to isolate all of my documents and data from whatever disk the OS and all the applications are residing on. Uncable that disk (or those disks) so that only the disk where you'll be installing Linux will be visible to the installer. Once the (re)installation is done, power down, recable the "personal" drives, reboot and add them back into your /etc/fstab wherever you need them mounted (like /home/r00ster, /home/r00ster/data, etc.). If you can't physically isolate your data (single disk in the box?), at least make very, very good notes as to where your non-OS data resides on the disk so you can keep the installer from trying to do something crazy. And I hope you at least managed to segregate the OS and your data into separate disk partitions. If not, you'll need to take some steps to protect it from the installer. Either move your data onto an alternate disk or backup all of your data before letting any installation process touch your disk. (Doing both wouldn't hurt; it only takes some extra time.) If you do have a single partition, after you've backed up your data, you should be able to tell the installer to create a second partition that you'll use to restore your data onto (/home/r00ster, for example) after the basic system is up and running. Or, if you went the secondary disk route, you can mount that disk where you need it in the filesystem.

Did I mention to backup all of your data beforehand? (I guess I'm a little obsessive about that when doing this sort of modification to my systems. )

Also,

Someone mentioned Firefox as a potential performance problem. I agree. One thing I found: if you're a Facebook user, don't leave a tab containing FB opened for extended periods. I find if I log out of FB and close the tab, Firefox performs better. Also, some web sites' use of Javascript seem to drag down FF performance to where scrolling is very jerky. At times, FF can be the biggest drag on the system and bouncing it cleans thing up. On my system when "ps -efL | grep firef | grep -v grep | wc -l" starts returning values in the upper 40s, FF is no fun to use. I've seen it go as high as the upper 50s but I do tend to have a LOT of tabs opened. YMMV.

One thing I don't recall anyone mentioning: If you can go to a multidisk setup, put a swap partition on each disk and then give each swap partition the same priority in /etc/fstab. That'll cause any swapping to be divided up evenly (pretty much) across each partition. How much? That can be a hotly debated issue. I created 2GB partitions on three disks on a system where I have 2.5GB RAM. When I do have swapping taking place I don't see the system response time taking a big hit (this on a P4/3GHz w/ hyperthreading). Again... YMMV.



--
Rick
 
Old 12-07-2013, 12:27 PM   #30
r00ster
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Location: boundary beach, bc
Distribution: 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.60-1+deb7u3 i686 GNU/Linux
Posts: 213

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Rick

Quote:
Originally Posted by rnturn
Personally, I'd monitor memory use first in an effort to find out what applications are the biggest hogs. Maybe you can find alternatives that aren't as memory hungry.
Roger on that.

I've spent a lot of time learning the ins-and-outs of jamesf's 'top' tutorial (post #5). To save time and bandwidth, here's where I am plus some observations.

Obs 1: Memory; @ Dec 5.13 'top' shows Iceweasel using 35% and LibreOffice 16%. Total 51%.
Code:
Total Mem: 505432 total,   453688 used,    51744 free,     5796 buffers
This shows 90% of mem is 'used'. What is using the 39% (90% - 51%)?

Thanks to your (mturn) prompt in the previous post...
Obs 2:
Code:
~$ ps -efL | grep firef | grep -v grep | wc -l
0
Obs 3: After writing to LibreOffice for an hour or so, its Mem dropped to 6%. while Iceweasel went from 35% to 40%.
Although I don't know what the output means:
Code:
rooster@royrogers:~$ ps -efL | grep libreoffice | grep -v grep | wc -l
8
rooster@royrogers:~$ ps -efL | grep soffice | grep -v grep | wc -l
5
Obs 4: Mem: Icedove. Curious effect on overall Mem. Before starting, 'KiB Mem' line showed 485872 used. After starting it went up to 515986. After exiting, it went down to 375258. After 10 minutes in LibreOffice, it went back up to 445112. Significance?

Obs 5: 'top' time columns for Iceweasel, ksysguard and xorg seem out-of-whack. Current session 'uptime' , 1h 3min. Iceweasel shows 2h 25m. Ksysguard shows 3h 52m. 'xorg shows 3h 6min. Significance?

Obs 6: the number of system freezes has diminished in the last month or so. If memory serves, a significant percentage of sys freezes involved scrolling both in Iceweasel and LibreOffice. A smaller, but noticeable percentage occurred during start-up while Iceweasel and LibreOffice were loading. Googling I found...

Obs 7 Even after closing Iceweasel (not killing) I see:
Code:
KiB Mem:    505432 total,   498476 used,     6956 free,     1504 buffers
Code:
3502 36.6 1061m  36m 180m  104 658m  20m  48k    0 S  20   0   0.0 iceweasel
Note 1: http://www.mozilla.org/security/anno...sa2013-90.html
Quote:
Description
Security researcher Nils reported two potentially exploitable memory corruption bugs involving scrolling. The first was a use-after-free condition due to scrolling an image document. The second was due to nodes in a range request being added as children of two different parents.
Note 2: I have 2 disks in the box.
80GB W-XP LAN Disabled (Not connected to Internet)
160GB HD Separate Partitions for Squeeze & Wheezy.
Note 3: Backups: I BU my DOCS, Boot and 'etc' folders to the 80GB HD and to Removable DVD.

I look forward to hearing from you again. I'm learning a lot of valuable insights and practical info from y'all.

rooster

Last edited by r00ster; 12-07-2013 at 02:23 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DHCP not detected - ROSA Marathon DisappearingOak Linux - Newbie 4 06-26-2012 04:27 AM
LXer: Tango Marathon LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 03-31-2007 08:33 AM
Bristol UK Half Marathon 2003 esteeven General 9 09-07-2003 04:42 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration