LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 02-12-2008, 12:37 PM   #1
MIRV
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2008
Location: Woodland, California
Distribution: Debian 4 Etch
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: 0
Unhappy Improve performance with Low/Small Memory


Hello All,

I am currently running CentOS 5.1 on a P4 1.8 w/ 128MB Memory 80GiG EIDE HDD with a 1GIG Swap partition. I have been desperately trying to improve the performance of this system. X is not even really usable as it stands. Thus far I have tried trimming down unnecessary system services with really no big difference. I have been debating recompiling the kernel to possibly 'weed out' some things, however would this even help as most add-ins these days seem to modularized? Is there anything else that anyone might suggest?

Thank you in advance for any help or suggestions.
 
Old 02-12-2008, 01:54 PM   #2
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301
So this would be a server or desktop ? What window manager are you using, it looks like you don't have much RAM, so likely using KDE and GNOME will be quite slow. But what specifically is going slow ?
 
Old 02-12-2008, 02:54 PM   #3
MIRV
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2008
Location: Woodland, California
Distribution: Debian 4 Etch
Posts: 7

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Mostly X performs slow. Everything *seems* to perform ok when I leave the default runlevel to 3.

As far as X. I am using KDE and even just the simple action of clicking one of the application menu's takes a significant ammount of time. This system is currently used as a LAMP test 'server' but I would also like to be able (if possible) to use it as a desktop.
 
Old 02-12-2008, 02:59 PM   #4
farslayer
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,249
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
I would suggest installing a lightweight desktop then.. XFCE4 for instance..

Also for a LAMP server more RAM would improve your performance if you are running something like a CMS site..

I would suggest upgrading that RAM and it would address your desktop performance issues as well. RAM is cheap after all.
 
Old 02-12-2008, 03:02 PM   #5
jschiwal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682
You might try a lighter desktop environment than kde such as enlightment or xfce4. The former is what EeePC is based on. The former is what xubuntu uses. Of course you could simply add more memory as well. I'm sure you could find old memory sticks on EBAY from people who had pulled a 128M stick and replaced it with a 512M stick on an older computer. Their new computer probably uses ddr2 memory now and so these sticks are useless to them now.
 
Old 02-12-2008, 04:16 PM   #6
MIRV
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2008
Location: Woodland, California
Distribution: Debian 4 Etch
Posts: 7

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Thank you. I am taking a shot at xfce4 as we speak, but XUbuntu looks very interesting itself. Says 'older computers will feel lively again' .
 
Old 02-12-2008, 05:23 PM   #7
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 29,415
Blog Entries: 55

Rep: Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600Reputation: 3600
I agree with Jschiwal adding RAM is the first thing to do.
 
Old 02-12-2008, 10:25 PM   #8
farslayer
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,249
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIRV View Post
Thank you. I am taking a shot at xfce4 as we speak, but XUbuntu looks very interesting itself. Says 'older computers will feel lively again' .

Ubuntu with the XFCE desktop as default.. so right along our recommendations. you should be able to install xfce on your current system as well without too much trouble.
 
Old 02-13-2008, 03:03 AM   #9
MIRV
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2008
Location: Woodland, California
Distribution: Debian 4 Etch
Posts: 7

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Yes sir I tried xfce4 tonight. While I did notice it works slightly faster it's still utterly useless even clicking the menu or sometimes even moving the mouse around is VERY delayed. I guess I will just have to fork out and upgrade the RAM in this machine if I wish to use it for anything else. I just find it frustrating a bit because I seem to remember a time about 10 years or so ago when XWin would do lovely on a system like this.
 
Old 02-13-2008, 07:11 PM   #10
jschiwal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Fargo, ND
Distribution: SuSE AMD64
Posts: 15,733

Rep: Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682Reputation: 682
Besides the window manager, also look at the processes that are running. You might need to disable some features such as beagle which would be using up cycles & memory in the background. Some things running in the background may be new from your previous experience. Library sizes may have increased since you last tried Linux on a Pentium II machine which could lead to less memory being available. The kernel may even have increased in size since then. Compiling a slimmer kernel or unloading unneeded modules may help as well. Applications may have also have grown in size in recent years. A program like OpenOffice will bog down a Pentium III system.

Also, give the system some time because on a new install (also true for other OS's as well) there may be some onetime processes that take more time, such as the "updatedb" program. On a new install, it might be a good idea to let it run overnight. A program like updatedb will be scheduled to run around 2am when you probably won't run the computer. But if it hadn't been run, then it may run instead after you boot up.

Because a Pentium II is so old, you might need to even revert to an older simpler windows manager such as fvwm or a generic unadorned X windows install, if you want to run X windows at all.

I once tried the Windows 98 that was installed on Pentium III dell server before stripping it off. I couldn't believe how slow it was. We have become accustomed to much faster processors and have forgotten the wait time involved previously.

Last edited by jschiwal; 02-13-2008 at 07:17 PM.
 
Old 02-13-2008, 08:00 PM   #11
farslayer
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,249
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
A base install of Debian with XFCE4 on a Pentium 133 MMX with 32 MB RAM and a 1 MB Video card ran decent.. the main issue I had was load time for applications. Once the web browser was open I could browse the net just fine.. With a base install of Debian you get ZERO extras, which obviously made a difference. Can you slim down your install a bit ? or try something like DSL, Slax, Vector, etc..
 
Old 02-14-2008, 03:39 AM   #12
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301Reputation: 1301
You know XFCE advertises that they are light, but they are only half as bloated as KDE, that's a lot of bloat still. Try fluxbox, icewm, windowmaker, etc. They are much lighter.
 
Old 02-14-2008, 03:02 PM   #13
PMorph
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 213

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIRV View Post
sometimes even moving the mouse around is VERY delayed
Well it shouldn't be THAT slow when everything is working properly.
A few years ago I was running on 128MB/650Mhz - debian /w KDE. It wasn't lightning fast, but perfectly usable.

What does free tell once you have booted to desktop? Is it already swapping badly?

Last edited by PMorph; 02-14-2008 at 03:12 PM.
 
Old 02-15-2008, 09:18 AM   #14
cornish
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Sussex, England
Distribution: Ubuntu 7.10
Posts: 131

Rep: Reputation: 15
If you using it as a lamp server do you really need X installed??

If your using X mainly as a front end to these services you might be better off with not installing X and using webmin to configure the services.

Ubuntu do a server distro which installs everything you need for a lamp server
 
Old 02-15-2008, 03:18 PM   #15
rg.viza
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2006
Posts: 74

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornish View Post
If you using it as a lamp server do you really need X installed??

If your using X mainly as a front end to these services you might be better off with not installing X and using webmin to configure the services.

Ubuntu do a server distro which installs everything you need for a lamp server
/yep
apache, php and mysql will have you swapping all by themselves. If you put window manager on there, well you know what happens. Nothing can fix it but more memory. mysql is the big offender. It can't avoid it. Try the my-small.cnf file from the mysql distro, and tweak the memory options smaller. It's far better to put a leash on mysql and have it be slow than it is to cripple the OS.

For demos just keep a second file that gives it more memory and don't run the window manager.

-Viz
 
  


Reply



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 On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Have i tried everything to improve my disk performance? drben Linux - Hardware 15 02-07-2006 02:38 PM
How can I improve gnome performance? pfaendtner Linux - Software 16 04-14-2005 11:52 AM
FreeBSD low memory performance btmiller *BSD 7 02-18-2005 08:54 AM
How to Improve performance of PC Imran Aziz Linux - Software 3 06-03-2004 02:10 PM
improve scsi hd performance? bdp Linux - Hardware 2 01-12-2004 11:37 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:10 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
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration