Mandriva - Mandriva

This is a discussion on Mandriva - Mandriva ; As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days) is fantastic. It's a good comptetitor to windows in the home market for sure. The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Mandriva

  1. Mandriva

    As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days) is
    fantastic. It's a good comptetitor to windows in the home market for sure.
    The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it a tiny
    bit slow?? Why is that? I have used Debian 4 and it was faster. I have also
    used Linspire and find it slower.
    -Pete


    --
    ......................................
    The above message is guaranteed to do nothing except take up space on your
    HD.



  2. Re: Mandriva

    On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:32:01 GMT, Pete wrote:
    > As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days) is
    > fantastic.


    Let's see, you managed to pick the Mandriva Usenet group, spell
    Mandriva correctly in the subject, included Mandriva in the body of
    the text. Trust me it's Mandriva.

    > The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it a tiny
    > bit slow?? Why is that? I have used Debian 4 and it was faster. I have also
    > used Linspire and find it slower.


    Yep, all those gui bells and whistles bog it down.
    I get into the KDE Control Center and disable Beagle and other KDE
    resorces/services.

    I hear the next release of KDE is supposed to be faster.
    I did notice it was faster when playing with Beta2 of the next
    Mandriva release.

    For speed check on my cheap on board ATI Radeon XPRESS 200 64meg video
    hardware, I see glxgears showing 6558 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1311.575 FPS

  3. Re: Mandriva

    On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:32:01 +0000, Pete wrote:

    > As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days) is
    > fantastic. It's a good comptetitor to windows in the home market for sure.
    > The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it a tiny
    > bit slow?? Why is that? I have used Debian 4 and it was faster. I have also
    > used Linspire and find it slower.
    > -Pete


    KDE, the default window manager is loaded with features and so its a large
    application and takes time to load and uses lots of ram. I've never used
    it on a regular basis for just that reason. Try IceWM or one of the
    smaller desktop managers that will load and run almost immediately.
    Another problem may be your disk drive. Make sure DMA is turned on and its
    performing as it should. man hdparm. If it's not installed, you'll have to
    install it. And lastly, Mandriva is precompiled for a multitude of
    hardware. The size of the kernel has almost doubled in the last 6 years.
    You could recompile it and delete support for harware you don't have and
    cut the size of the kernel dramatically. Is it worth it? I'm not sure. I
    did it once a few years back and cut the kernel size considerably, but
    you'd have to do it everytime you upgraded, so I wouldn't call it
    practical for the average user. Good luck.

    --
    Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
    http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
    My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
    HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm


  4. Re: Mandriva

    Wes Newell wrote:
    > On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:32:01 +0000, Pete wrote:
    >
    >> As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days) is
    >> fantastic. It's a good comptetitor to windows in the home market for sure.
    >> The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it a tiny
    >> bit slow?? Why is that? I have used Debian 4 and it was faster. I have also
    >> used Linspire and find it slower.
    >> -Pete

    >
    > KDE, the default window manager is loaded with features and so its a large
    > application and takes time to load and uses lots of ram. I've never used
    > it on a regular basis for just that reason. Try IceWM or one of the
    > smaller desktop managers that will load and run almost immediately.
    > Another problem may be your disk drive. Make sure DMA is turned on and its
    > performing as it should. man hdparm. If it's not installed, you'll have to
    > install it. And lastly, Mandriva is precompiled for a multitude of
    > hardware. The size of the kernel has almost doubled in the last 6 years.
    > You could recompile it and delete support for harware you don't have and
    > cut the size of the kernel dramatically. Is it worth it? I'm not sure. I
    > did it once a few years back and cut the kernel size considerably, but
    > you'd have to do it everytime you upgraded, so I wouldn't call it
    > practical for the average user. Good luck.
    >

    Thanks for the answers. I have 512 RAM. Is that adequate for Mandriva?
    I also have a Pentium IV. I downloaded the i586 DVD which is supposed to
    be optimized for that class of machine, but what the heck??
    -Pete

  5. Re: Mandriva

    Pete wrote:

    > As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days)
    > is fantastic. It's a good comptetitor to windows in the home market for
    > sure. The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it a
    > tiny bit slow?? Why is that? I have used Debian 4 and it was faster. I
    > have also used Linspire and find it slower.
    > -Pete
    >


    I found 2006.0 faster than 2007.0 and 2007.0 faster than 2007.1.
    I don't really know why. The harddrive is slower.

    2008.0 beta is really fast. We all hope that 2008.0 will be the new Mandriva
    speed reference. I'm not sure about the final release.


    Regards


  6. Re: Mandriva

    On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:38:11 -0400, Pete wrote:

    > Thanks for the answers. I have 512 RAM. Is that adequate for Mandriva?
    > I also have a Pentium IV. I downloaded the i586 DVD which is supposed to
    > be optimized for that class of machine, but what the heck??
    > -Pete


    512M worked fine for me running a few servers and mythtv. Check your swap
    file (free command) and see if it's being used much. There are lots of
    P4's. Some of the older ones are pretty slow, but the cpu is just one part
    of system performance. After a fresh boot, open Open office and time it.
    Close it and reopen it and time it again. The difference in time is what
    the HDD is costing you as it will load from cache the second time. Install
    hdparm and check your drive speeds. These are typical;

    [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda

    /dev/hda:
    Timing cached reads: 2048 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1023.90 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 112 MB in 3.00 seconds = 37.27 MB/sec
    [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/md0

    /dev/md0:
    Timing cached reads: 2416 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1208.51 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 450 MB in 3.01 seconds = 149.62 MB/sec
    [root@wes2 wes]#

    hda is a single 120GB 7200rpm WD drive. md0 is a 2 sata 320GB Seagate raid
    0 array. If you're not close to the speed of hda, then you need to find
    out why.


    --
    Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
    http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
    My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
    HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm


  7. Re: Mandriva

    Wes Newell wrote:
    > On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:38:11 -0400, Pete wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks for the answers. I have 512 RAM. Is that adequate for Mandriva?
    >> I also have a Pentium IV. I downloaded the i586 DVD which is supposed to
    >> be optimized for that class of machine, but what the heck??
    >> -Pete

    >
    > 512M worked fine for me running a few servers and mythtv. Check your swap
    > file (free command) and see if it's being used much. There are lots of
    > P4's. Some of the older ones are pretty slow, but the cpu is just one part
    > of system performance. After a fresh boot, open Open office and time it.
    > Close it and reopen it and time it again. The difference in time is what
    > the HDD is costing you as it will load from cache the second time. Install
    > hdparm and check your drive speeds. These are typical;
    >
    > [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda
    >
    > /dev/hda:
    > Timing cached reads: 2048 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1023.90 MB/sec
    > Timing buffered disk reads: 112 MB in 3.00 seconds = 37.27 MB/sec
    > [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/md0
    >
    > /dev/md0:
    > Timing cached reads: 2416 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1208.51 MB/sec
    > Timing buffered disk reads: 450 MB in 3.01 seconds = 149.62 MB/sec
    > [root@wes2 wes]#
    >
    > hda is a single 120GB 7200rpm WD drive. md0 is a 2 sata 320GB Seagate raid
    > 0 array. If you're not close to the speed of hda, then you need to find
    > out why.


    In a terminal window, run /usr/bin/top; and see if anything is
    using undue amounts of cpu cycles. Make sure DMA is enabled, as
    Mandriva kernels ship with it disabled if I remember correctly.
    Also check and see if settings for read ahead are reasonable.

    Write caching will make writing to disk more efficient, but any
    interruption during/prior to a write can foul things up. I tend
    not to use it, but I have fast SATA disk drives. man hdparm
    is definitely worth a read.

    Cheers!

    jim b.
    --
    UNIX is not user-unfriendly; it merely
    expects users to be computer-friendly.

  8. Re: Mandriva

    Pete wrote:
    > As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days) is
    > fantastic. It's a good comptetitor to windows in the home market for sure.
    > The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it a tiny
    > bit slow?? Why is that? I have used Debian 4 and it was faster. I have also
    > used Linspire and find it slower.
    > -Pete
    >
    >


    You could have a look at PCLinuxOS, which is Mandriva based. It is
    newbie friendly, and there are some people saying PCLinuxOS is what
    Mandriva should be. Whatever that means.

  9. Re: Mandriva

    Wes Newell wrote:
    > On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:38:11 -0400, Pete wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks for the answers. I have 512 RAM. Is that adequate for Mandriva?
    >> I also have a Pentium IV. I downloaded the i586 DVD which is supposed to
    >> be optimized for that class of machine, but what the heck??
    >> -Pete

    >
    > 512M worked fine for me running a few servers and mythtv. Check your swap
    > file (free command) and see if it's being used much. There are lots of
    > P4's. Some of the older ones are pretty slow, but the cpu is just one part
    > of system performance. After a fresh boot, open Open office and time it.
    > Close it and reopen it and time it again. The difference in time is what
    > the HDD is costing you as it will load from cache the second time. Install
    > hdparm and check your drive speeds. These are typical;
    >
    > [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda
    >
    > /dev/hda:
    > Timing cached reads: 2048 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1023.90 MB/sec
    > Timing buffered disk reads: 112 MB in 3.00 seconds = 37.27 MB/sec
    > [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/md0
    >
    > /dev/md0:
    > Timing cached reads: 2416 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1208.51 MB/sec
    > Timing buffered disk reads: 450 MB in 3.01 seconds = 149.62 MB/sec
    > [root@wes2 wes]#
    >
    > hda is a single 120GB 7200rpm WD drive. md0 is a 2 sata 320GB Seagate raid
    > 0 array. If you're not close to the speed of hda, then you need to find
    > out why.

    =======================================
    This is an new interesting game to me .
    I did the test on my system using 2 HDs from 1999 and 2001 respectively.
    Results ; about 1/10 of Wes's HDs Is this a fixed characteristic or
    can it be changed . I have to check but speed of both drives is likely
    5400rpm (typical newbie question ?)

    Linux drive (100 GB)
    /dev/hdb:
    Timing cached reads: 256 MB in 2.01 seconds = 127.67 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.06 seconds = 30.07 MB/sec


    Windoze drive (40GB
    /dev/hda:
    Timing cached reads: 222 MB in 2.01 seconds = 110.60 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 76 MB in 3.01 seconds = 25.24 MB/sec
    [root@localhost frank]#

    This NG provides me with a lot of learning facilities.

    Frank

  10. Re: Mandriva

    On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 12:28:37 +0100, Highland Ham wrote:

    > I did the test on my system using 2 HDs from 1999 and 2001 respectively.
    > Results ; about 1/10 of Wes's HDs Is this a fixed characteristic or
    > can it be changed . I have to check but speed of both drives is likely
    > 5400rpm (typical newbie question ?)
    >
    > Linux drive (100 GB)
    > /dev/hdb:
    > Timing cached reads: 256 MB in 2.01 seconds = 127.67 MB/sec
    > Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.06 seconds = 30.07 MB/sec
    >
    >
    > Windoze drive (40GB
    > /dev/hda:
    > Timing cached reads: 222 MB in 2.01 seconds = 110.60 MB/sec
    > Timing buffered disk reads: 76 MB in 3.01 seconds = 25.24 MB/sec
    > [root@localhost frank]#


    HDD performance depends on several things, including where the OS was
    installed on the drive. Access speed is cut proportionally by where the
    tracks are you are trying to access. The farther away from the start of
    the drive, the slower it will be. Not much one can do about this, but
    other factors are using DMA, and the set speed, which can be controlled up
    to the limits of the drive. hdparm -i, hdparm -I, and hdparm -d will give
    you an insight as to the max settings of the drives and what speed you are
    set to. I would guess that most OS's set these up properly, but it doesn't
    hurt to check. Here's the effect of just turning DMA off.

    [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda

    /dev/hda:
    Timing cached reads: 2624 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1312.52 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 118 MB in 3.04 seconds = 38.76 MB/sec
    [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -d0 /dev/hda

    /dev/hda:
    setting using_dma to 0 (off)
    using_dma = 0 (off)
    [root@wes2 wes]# hdparm -tT /dev/hda

    /dev/hda:
    Timing cached reads: 2840 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1420.97 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 14 MB in 3.23 seconds = 4.33 MB/sec
    [root@wes2 wes]#

    Please read the hdparm manual prior to going nuts with it. man hdaprm

    --
    Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
    http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
    My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
    HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm


  11. Re: Mandriva

    Wes Newell writes:

    >On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:32:01 +0000, Pete wrote:


    >> As a newbie, I find Mandriva or Madrake (whatever it's called these days) is
    >> fantastic. It's a good comptetitor to windows in the home market for sure.
    >> The GUI is what we newbies need. However, does anyone else find it a tiny
    >> bit slow?? Why is that? I have used Debian 4 and it was faster. I have also
    >> used Linspire and find it slower.
    >> -Pete


    >KDE, the default window manager is loaded with features and so its a large
    >application and takes time to load and uses lots of ram. I've never used
    >it on a regular basis for just that reason. Try IceWM or one of the
    >smaller desktop managers that will load and run almost immediately.
    >Another problem may be your disk drive. Make sure DMA is turned on and its
    >performing as it should. man hdparm. If it's not installed, you'll have to
    >install it. And lastly, Mandriva is precompiled for a multitude of
    >hardware. The size of the kernel has almost doubled in the last 6 years.
    >You could recompile it and delete support for harware you don't have and
    >cut the size of the kernel dramatically. Is it worth it? I'm not sure. I
    >did it once a few years back and cut the kernel size considerably, but
    >you'd have to do it everytime you upgraded, so I wouldn't call it
    >practical for the average user. Good luck.


    And then you discover that you have just disabled your system, because some
    obscure, badly described option you thought you did not need is actually
    crucial to your system. Most of the "size" is modules which are never
    loaded anyway. Ie, they take up disk space, but not ram, and disk space is
    cheap.

    The OP needs to run some applications, not watching icons appear on his
    desktop to measure how fast it is. It is true that resource hungry apps (
    like beagle) can slow down even apps when it is running. Unfortunately
    Mandriva have removed slocate, for no apparent reason. You can still get it
    ( now called mlocate for some reason) from the repositories, but it is not
    on the dvd.


    >--
    >Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
    >http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
    >My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
    >HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm



+ Reply to Thread