LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-10-2009, 01:27 PM   #16
guanx
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,081

Rep: Reputation: 163Reputation: 163

Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
That dd test is not as clear a benchmark as you might think, it's not a linear relationship:

The hdparm -tT is the most consistent test.
Use "fdatasync". See "man dd". The hdparm tests reading, not writing, I think.
 
Old 03-10-2009, 02:16 PM   #17
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292
Interesting, I didn't know what that option did, but you're right now the results are much more comparable and perhaps useful:

Code:
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=1000
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
262144000 bytes (262 MB) copied, 4.60565 s, 56.9 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=1000 conv=fdatasync
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
262144000 bytes (262 MB) copied, 5.29181 s, 49.5 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=500 conv=fdatasync
500+0 records in
500+0 records out
131072000 bytes (131 MB) copied, 2.06997 s, 63.3 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=100 conv=fdatasync
100+0 records in
100+0 records out
26214400 bytes (26 MB) copied, 0.45019 s, 58.2 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=5000 conv=fdatasync
5000+0 records in
5000+0 records out
1310720000 bytes (1.3 GB) copied, 29.6797 s, 44.2 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=1000 conv=fsync
1000+0 records in
1000+0 records out
262144000 bytes (262 MB) copied, 5.10063 s, 51.4 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=500 conv=fsync
500+0 records in
500+0 records out
131072000 bytes (131 MB) copied, 2.05835 s, 63.7 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=2000 conv=fsync
2000+0 records in
2000+0 records out
524288000 bytes (524 MB) copied, 10.9581 s, 47.8 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=5000 conv=fsync
5000+0 records in
5000+0 records out
1310720000 bytes (1.3 GB) copied, 30.2539 s, 43.3 MB/s
bash-3.1$ dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=256k count=50 conv=fsync
50+0 records in
50+0 records out
13107200 bytes (13 MB) copied, 0.223791 s, 58.6 MB/s
 
Old 03-10-2009, 02:53 PM   #18
mbvo
Member
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: the land of confusion
Distribution: slackware-current
Posts: 220

Rep: Reputation: 31
this is just a guess, but are you using runlevel 3? or 4? and do you have mysql installed? mysql has failed on me a few times and running in level 3 i can see mysql was crashing and restarting itself repeatedly the whole time the computer was running resulting in the computer taking nearly twice as much time to do anything.

also im running on a 266 mhz p2 with 400 mb pc100 and neomagic 4mb video card, and it takes bout 15 seconds max for ff to start yours should outperform mine majorly.
 
Old 03-10-2009, 09:32 PM   #19
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
Try "anticipatory".
No effect. First launch:
Firefox - 20 seconds
Opera - 10 seconds
KMail - 7 seconds
Nvidia-settings - 4 seconds.
As I said - I experience slowdown only at first launch. At the first launch of any of those program hdd is being heavily accessed. At the second, "fast" launch it looks like all files are loaded from RAM cache (HDD led doesn't even blink when program loads quickly).


Quote:
Originally Posted by mbvo View Post
this is just a guess, but are you using runlevel 3? or 4? and do you have mysql installed?
runlevel 4, mysql not running (installed, disabled).

Quote:
Originally Posted by mbvo View Post
also im running on a 266 mhz p2 with 400 mb pc100 and neomagic 4mb video card, and it takes bout 15 seconds max for ff to start yours should outperform mine majorly.
I know it should outperform, but it clearly doesn't do that and shows nearly similar launch time instead.
--EDIT--
I've tried this article:
http://en.opensuse.org/Speeding_up_Ext3
Switching journal mode on root partition and enabling "noatime" gives small performance boost, but still doesn't significantly decrease start times:
firefox - 18 seconds,
opera - 7 seconds
kmail - 7 seconds.
nvidia-settings - 2.9 seconds

Does anyone here has machine that runs slackware and can run any of those in less-than-second time after cold boot? Or at least less than in three seconds (for firefox, opera, kmail)?

I also found article which explains how to flush filesystem caches without rebooting machine:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/...tart-simulator

Last edited by ErV; 03-10-2009 at 10:12 PM.
 
Old 03-11-2009, 02:22 AM   #20
guanx
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,081

Rep: Reputation: 163Reputation: 163
Core Duo U2500 / 2GB / Firefox-3.0.3 / Linux-2.6.28.1

Homepage is "about:blank".

Time result of immediate close after first start (average over several tries):

1. When Firefox is on a 250GB SATA disk:
real about 8.0s (my reaction time of about 0.5s is substracted)
user 4.4s
sys 0.45s

2. When firefox is on a USB flash drive (read=18~19MB/s):
real about 7.5s (my reaction time of about 0.5s is substracted)
user 4.3s
sys 0.45s

So we know:

1. Firefox starts very slowly;
2. Disk seek time is not the main cause.
 
Old 03-11-2009, 04:49 AM   #21
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by guanx View Post
So we know:

1. Firefox starts very slowly;
2. Disk seek time is not the main cause.
What about other software? Reducing launch time of kmail/etc would be nice.

Anyway, I tried profiling the system with oprofile after flushing caches, and got following results (generated using opreport -l)

firefox launch:
Code:
Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Cycles outside of halt state) with a unit mask of 0x00 (No unit mask) count 100000
samples  %        app name                 symbol name
14193    24.0559  libxul.so                /usr/lib/firefox-3.0.6/libxul.so
14063    23.8356  no-vmlinux               /no-vmlinux
9189     15.5746  libmozjs.so              /usr/lib/firefox-3.0.6/libmozjs.so
2649      4.4898  libc-2.7.so              strcmp
2298      3.8949  libsqlite3.so            /usr/lib/firefox-3.0.6/libsqlite3.so
2016      3.4169  libjemalloc.so           /usr/lib/firefox-3.0.6/libjemalloc.so
1141      1.9339  libfontconfig.so.1.3.0   /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1.3.0
965       1.6356  libc-2.7.so              memcpy
885       1.5000  libqt-mt.so.3.3.8        /usr/lib/qt-3.3.8b/lib/libqt-mt.so.3.3.8
741       1.2559  libnspr4.so              /usr/lib/firefox-3.0.6/libnspr4.so
730       1.2373  Xorg                     /usr/bin/Xorg
674       1.1424  libpthread-2.7.so        pthread_mutex_lock
kmail launch:
Code:
Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Cycles outside of halt state) with a unit mask of 0x00 (No unit mask) count 100000
samples  %        app name                 symbol name
18128    32.9229  no-vmlinux               /no-vmlinux
5673     10.3029  libqt-mt.so.3.3.8        /usr/lib/qt-3.3.8b/lib/libqt-mt.so.3.3.8
3552      6.4509  ld-2.7.so                do_lookup_x
3480      6.3201  ld-2.7.so                strcmp
3369      6.1186  libc-2.7.so              strcmp
2979      5.4103  ld-2.7.so                check_match.8290
1791      3.2527  libX11.so.6.2.0          /usr/lib/libX11.so.6.2.0
1352      2.4554  libXfont.so.1.4.1        /usr/lib/libXfont.so.1.4.1
1281      2.3265  libc-2.7.so              _int_malloc
1099      1.9959  libkdecore.so.4.2.0      /usr/lib/libkdecore.so.4.2.0
772       1.4021  Xorg                     /usr/bin/Xorg
763       1.3857  libstdc++.so.6.0.9       /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6.0.9
744       1.3512  libc-2.7.so              _int_free
671       1.2186  libc-2.7.so              memcpy
658       1.1950  nvidia_drv.so            /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.so
655       1.1896  libc-2.7.so              malloc
596       1.0824  libz.so.1.2.3            /usr/lib/libz.so.1.2.3
opera launch:
Code:
Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Cycles outside of halt state) with a unit mask of 0x00 (No unit mask) count 100000
samples  %        app name                 symbol name
13841    23.7883  no-vmlinux               /no-vmlinux
13634    23.4326  opera                    /usr/local/lib/opera/9.63/opera
2750      4.7264  libc-2.7.so              strcmp
2682      4.6095  ld-2.7.so                do_lookup_x
2430      4.1764  libX11.so.6.2.0          /usr/lib/libX11.so.6.2.0
1570      2.6983  libXfont.so.1.4.1        /usr/lib/libXfont.so.1.4.1
1329      2.2841  libGL.so.180.29          /usr/lib/libGL.so.180.29
1276      2.1930  ld-2.7.so                strcmp
1269      2.1810  libqt-mt.so.3.3.8        /usr/lib/qt-3.3.8b/lib/libqt-mt.so.3.3.8
1164      2.0005  ld-2.7.so                check_match.8290
1010      1.7359  Xorg                     /usr/bin/Xorg
938       1.6121  libc-2.7.so              _int_malloc
832       1.4299  libc-2.7.so              fgetc
793       1.3629  nvidia_drv.so            /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.so
706       1.2134  libfontconfig.so.1.3.0   /usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1.3.0
656       1.1275  libc-2.7.so              __gconv_transform_utf8_internal
610       1.0484  libz.so.1.2.3            /usr/lib/libz.so.1.2.3
592       1.0175  bash                     /bin/bash
It looks like that (except firefox), most time during launch is spent within kernel, but it is hard to say where (oprofile needs vmlinux file to profile kernel, and vmlinux is too big to be handled by lilo, and oprofile refuses to accept it).
 
Old 03-11-2009, 04:58 AM   #22
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErV View Post
It looks like that (except firefox), most time during launch is spent within kernel, but it is hard to say where (oprofile needs vmlinux file to profile kernel, and vmlinux is too big to be handled by lilo, and oprofile refuses to accept it).
So lilo is involved ? If so, try grub.
 
Old 03-11-2009, 05:28 AM   #23
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H View Post
try grub.
Which one - "grub 2" or "grub legacy"?
Anyway, changing bootloader will have to wait at least until tomorrow.
 
Old 03-11-2009, 06:02 AM   #24
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292
I don't know, but I use the one in the '/extra' directory on the Slackware DVD.
 
Old 03-12-2009, 11:09 AM   #25
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292
For an exact number FF 3 takes a little under 8 seconds to start.
 
Old 03-12-2009, 12:59 PM   #26
Ilgar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2, Slackwarearm-current
Posts: 1,035

Rep: Reputation: 149Reputation: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErV View Post
Despite enabled dma I have impression that everything that accesses disk produces noticeable system-wide slowdown, which could explain slow start of applications. For example, here is ksysguard graph for "dd if=/dev/zero of=1.bin bs=1M count=2048".
Maybe something is "wrong" with ext3 mount options and can be improved?:
Aah, but isn't that the famous Linux I/O wait bug? Here is a Slashdot article and here is the Kernel bugzilla. It was introduced somewhere around 2.6.18 and is unresolved yet; but recently it gained some attention and is being actively worked on.

It may not necessarily be the cause of your problems, but it's likely. I haven't done any tests on my laptop, it has a slow 5400 RPM drive anyway, and I use LUKS encryption which causes some overhead. But still, I think my system suffers from this bug. My Firefox startup time is not that slow (should be like 8-10 secs) but heavy disk I/O like copying large files slows my system down terribly.

Last edited by Ilgar; 03-12-2009 at 01:02 PM.
 
Old 03-12-2009, 02:25 PM   #27
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292
So is this bug supposed to affect everyone ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by thomas.pi
Since 2.6.26/27 everyone should be affected by this issue.
As I'm running slamd64 12.1, my kernel version is 2.6.24.7 and I am NOT affected. Maybe try another kernel version, one before 2.6.26 ?
 
Old 03-12-2009, 02:54 PM   #28
Ilgar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2, Slackwarearm-current
Posts: 1,035

Rep: Reputation: 149Reputation: 149
That's an early post by thomas.pi, those who have tried past versions seem to agree on 2.6.17 or 18 as the starting point. I've read much of that Bugzilla thread and the situation seems to be this: It's very hard to pinpoint what the cause is and it's even possible that there are several different bugs with the same symptoms. It's agreed that at least on some architectures/hardware/filesystems (and these are not so rare, btw) recent kernels are behaving significantly worse under high I/O load compared to earlier ones. They're still trying to find a test case that is uniformly reproducible. For some of the complaints the disk controllers were the likely causes, for some cases poor fysnc performance of ext3 is suspected. But quite a few people were able to reproduce this problem on different filesystems and hardware, so there probably is something wrong also with the scheduler (and if so, that should affect everyone). Using Deadline, Anticipatory or CFQ doesn't seem to make much difference. It's a mess really, as one of the kernel devs pointed out:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Axboe
And to make a more general comment... This bug is impossible to solve, since it
(once again) has degraded into somewhere for everybody to tunnel everything
that relates to a system feeling sluggish...

...I'd LOVE to be able to look into this, but honestly I have no idea where to
start.
 
Old 03-12-2009, 06:57 PM   #29
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilgar View Post
Aah, but isn't that the famous Linux I/O wait bug?
It is quite possible, because I experience slowdown during copying of large files. If it is it, then it is "great". Unresolved kernel bug is just what I needed.

I'll write again once I finally try to profile system with uncompressed vmlinux image.
 
Old 03-13-2009, 04:23 AM   #30
H_TeXMeX_H
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292Reputation: 1292
I say if that is the case try a different filesystem, it may be related to ext3. It seems other filesystems have less of an issue with this. ext4 also counts as possible solution.
 
  


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
OpenOffice 2.0 is very slow to launch tongliu8 Linux - Software 24 12-24-2010 12:13 PM
fix: launch media player keyboard shortcut tutwabee Ubuntu 0 04-22-2006 04:33 PM
Slow OOo launch in Mandriva SE JerryP Mandriva 3 06-06-2005 06:26 PM
Slow name resolving _and_ slow konsole launch dangerbaby Mandriva 7 03-03-2005 06:11 AM
just to share acroread UTF-8 error launch fix. demmylls Linux - General 1 04-07-2004 05:34 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35 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