Re: Bad performance

2003-09-18 Thread Peter Jeremy
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 09:15:50PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: >sebastian ssmoller wrote: >>here is my lmmon output. >> >> Motherboard Temp Voltages >> >> 255C / 491F / 528KVcore1: +3.984V >> Vcore2: +3.984V >>Fan Speeds + 3.3V: +3

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread Conrad J. Sabatier
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:19:38PM +0200, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > (...) > btw: the mozilla-firebird performance problem mention earlier seems to > be something different: firebird launches relativly fast and as soon as > running i can us the menus and everything which is reachable via mouse. >

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread Scott Long
sebastian ssmoller wrote: On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 20:16, Don Bowman wrote: From: sebastian ssmoller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... i turned of acpi on startup an voila :) : gdm starts two times faster as before (!) (30s -> 15-17s) can anyone explain me why, pls ? I wonder how hot your processor is?

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread Scott Lambert
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:31:52PM +0200, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 20:16, Don Bowman wrote: > > I wonder how hot your processor is? perhaps ACPI is throttling > > the clock back, either duty cycle or frequency. > > In your bios you can set the power mode, perhaps you > > c

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread sebastian ssmoller
On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 20:42, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:31:52PM +0200, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > > Motherboard Temp Voltages > > > > 255C / 491F / 528KVcore1: +3.984V > >Vcore2: +3.984V > > Fan Speeds +

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread Steve Kargl
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 08:31:52PM +0200, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > Motherboard Temp Voltages > > 255C / 491F / 528KVcore1: +3.984V >Vcore2: +3.984V > Fan Speeds + 3.3V: +3.984V >+ 5.0V: +6.65

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread Conrad J. Sabatier
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 06:05:59PM +0200, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > > as mentioned: really bad performace occurs when lauching mozilla, gaim, > gnome2, etc. ... when mozilla is running the perfomance seems to be ok > ... possibly a bit too slow but i do not know how to proof this (?) I discover

RE: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread sebastian ssmoller
On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 20:16, Don Bowman wrote: > From: sebastian ssmoller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ... > > > > i turned of acpi on startup an voila :) : gdm starts two > > times faster as > > before (!) (30s -> 15-17s) > > > > can anyone explain me why, pls ? > > I wonder how hot your proce

RE: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread Don Bowman
From: sebastian ssmoller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... > > i turned of acpi on startup an voila :) : gdm starts two > times faster as > before (!) (30s -> 15-17s) > > can anyone explain me why, pls ? I wonder how hot your processor is? perhaps ACPI is throttling the clock back, either duty cyc

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread sebastian ssmoller
(...) hi, > I agree with the general concensus that this shows all the symptoms of > a network or DNS problem - though the switch from SIS to nVidia may > have disturbed X. > > Did you change any system configuration (hostname etc) when you moved > the disk? Is the 'production' environment iden

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-17 Thread sebastian ssmoller
here is my vmstat -i output: interrupt total rate stray irq01 0 stray irq71 0 npx0 irq131 0 ata0 irq1492143 2 ata1 irq15

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-15 Thread Sean Chittenden
> i recently switched from mandrake to freebsd. i used a second system, > to install freebsd 5.1 (release) on a 15 gb western digital disk. i > installed the whole system without problems and managed to start gdm and > gnome2. everything worked fine and performance (launching gdm, gnome2 > and fir

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-14 Thread Sebastian Ssmoller
hi, i did a lot of changes and tests last night :) -u were right there was a bug in the network config (i fixed some named entries) now netstat -r is really fast (no timeouts which occured before) -i wrote a simple c test program using gethostname, gethostbyname, gethostbyaddr as suggested it w

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread Peter Jeremy
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 02:52:29PM +0200, sebastian ssmoller wrote: >then i moved the disk from the hardware used during install into the >"production" environment which includes VIA 82C8363 (Apollo KT133A) ... >everything worked fine again. BUT: launching gdm needs a lot of time, >same for gnome2.

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread Fred Souza
> i guess portmapper is not runing. whats the name of the rc.d script on fbsd > ? > i looked for portmap (as under linux) but haven't found in /etc/rc.d ... If you're running 4.x, it's portmap. If it's 5.x, it's rpcbind. To have it loaded at boot-time, just put rpcbind_enable="YES" into your

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread Arjan van Leeuwen
> > > > > > as mentioned: really bad performace occurs when lauching mozilla, gaim, > > > gnome2, etc. ... when mozilla is running the perfomance seems to be ok > > > ... possibly a bit too slow but i do not know how to proof this (?) > > > > > > i suppose a udma/disk/controller problem. i found ou

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread Fred Souza
> I have the same southbridge and a very fast system. That can't be the problem > - and it really does sound like a network problem. It looks like it's looking > for a host that it can't find. Possibly your own hostname. I've seen a problem somewhat like that one if portmap/rpcbind is not ru

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread Arjan van Leeuwen
On Saturday 13 September 2003 18:05, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > On Sat, 2003-09-13 at 16:34, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > On 13 Sep 2003 14:52:29 +0200 > > > > sebastian ssmoller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > then i moved the disk from the hardware used during install into the > > > "producti

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread sebastian ssmoller
On Sat, 2003-09-13 at 16:34, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On 13 Sep 2003 14:52:29 +0200 > sebastian ssmoller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > then i moved the disk from the hardware used during install into the > > "production" environment which includes VIA 82C8363 (Apollo KT133A) > > board, NVid

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread sebastian ssmoller
On Sat, 2003-09-13 at 16:34, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On 13 Sep 2003 14:52:29 +0200 > sebastian ssmoller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > then i moved the disk from the hardware used during install into the > > "production" environment which includes VIA 82C8363 (Apollo KT133A) > > board, NVid

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread Alexander Leidinger
On 13 Sep 2003 14:52:29 +0200 sebastian ssmoller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > then i moved the disk from the hardware used during install into the > "production" environment which includes VIA 82C8363 (Apollo KT133A) > board, NVidia GeForce2 grafic card (using nvidia native driver for x11), > AMD

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread sebastian ssmoller
On Sat, 2003-09-13 at 15:08, Arjan van Leeuwen wrote: > On Saturday 13 September 2003 14:52, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > > hi, > > i recently switched from mandrake to freebsd. i used a second system, > > to install freebsd 5.1 (release) on a 15 gb western digital disk. i > > installed the whole sy

Re: Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread Arjan van Leeuwen
On Saturday 13 September 2003 14:52, sebastian ssmoller wrote: > hi, > i recently switched from mandrake to freebsd. i used a second system, > to install freebsd 5.1 (release) on a 15 gb western digital disk. i > installed the whole system without problems and managed to start gdm and > gnome2. eve

Bad performance

2003-09-13 Thread sebastian ssmoller
hi, i recently switched from mandrake to freebsd. i used a second system, to install freebsd 5.1 (release) on a 15 gb western digital disk. i installed the whole system without problems and managed to start gdm and gnome2. everything worked fine and performance (launching gdm, gnome2 and firebird)