Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish - Solaris

This is a discussion on Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish - Solaris ; Hi, I just installed Solaris 10 to AMD64 (3000+, 1.8GHz) machine w. 1G memory (ASUS A8V Deluxe motherboard). Solaris works nicely, except that UI is slow, compared e.g. to Ubuntu (6.06) or Fedora Core (4). For example, changing desktop to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

  1. Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Hi,

    I just installed Solaris 10 to AMD64 (3000+, 1.8GHz) machine w. 1G
    memory (ASUS A8V Deluxe motherboard).

    Solaris works nicely, except that UI is slow, compared e.g. to Ubuntu
    (6.06) or Fedora Core (4).

    For example, changing desktop to another takes noticeable amount of time
    (~200ms). And when Firefox is rendering a page, mouse start to "stutter".

    These together makes the use "not fun". What could be the reason?

    I have installed nVidia drivers for the X and they did improve, although
    only a little (the adapter is GeForce FX 5200).

    --
    @jhol

    http://iki.fi/jhol/decss.html

  2. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Jouko Holopainen wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > I just installed Solaris 10 to AMD64 (3000+, 1.8GHz) machine w. 1G
    > memory (ASUS A8V Deluxe motherboard).
    >
    > Solaris works nicely, except that UI is slow, compared e.g. to Ubuntu
    > (6.06) or Fedora Core (4).
    >


    Which UI, please?

    > For example, changing desktop to another takes noticeable amount of time
    > (~200ms). And when Firefox is rendering a page, mouse start to "stutter".
    >
    > These together makes the use "not fun". What could be the reason?
    >
    > I have installed nVidia drivers for the X and they did improve, although
    > only a little (the adapter is GeForce FX 5200).
    >


    From what I've seen, the 5200 is a dog. This might be a
    contributor, but...

    Please try "mpstat 1" and see what the intr and csw colums say.

    Maybe some output from "prstat -m 1" might be interesting as
    well. Who's up top?


    Dave

  3. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Dave Littell wrote:
    > Jouko Holopainen wrote:
    >> Solaris works nicely, except that UI is slow, compared e.g. to Ubuntu
    >> (6.06) or Fedora Core (4).

    >
    > Which UI, please?


    Sorry. Gnome. Or, actually, "Java Desktop System" :-)

    > From what I've seen, the 5200 is a dog. This might be a contributor,
    > but...


    Yes, I agree, 5200 is slow. But not this slow and I am not doing any 3D.

    > Please try "mpstat 1" and see what the intr and csw colums say.


    CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl
    0 0 0 0 408 307 230 7 0 0 0 372 4 0 0 96
    0 0 0 0 418 319 991 439 0 0 0 3437 52 2 0 46
    0 157 0 0 412 312 848 391 0 0 0 3059 98 2 0 0
    0 207 0 0 414 314 885 413 0 0 0 3075 82 3 0 15

    The difference in context switches when "idle" (first line) and when
    doing something (the others) is big. Interrupts stay the same, though.

    > Maybe some output from "prstat -m 1" might be interesting as well.
    > Who's up top?


    PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/NLWP
    6361 ME 56M 48M sleep 59 0 0:01:10 10% Xorg/1
    6550 ME 96M 45M sleep 49 0 0:00:08 1,5% thunderbird-bin/3
    6546 ME 82M 29M sleep 59 0 0:00:09 0,5% gnome-terminal/2
    ....

    It seems to be easy to get Xorg to take 30% CPU (just swap between
    workspaces). No other process take any noticeable CPU.

    Is OpenSolaris faster? (at least the Gnome would be much better as this
    is ancient).

    --
    @jhol

    http://iki.fi/jhol/decss.html

  4. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Jouko Holopainen wrote:
    >
    > Yes, I agree, 5200 is slow. But not this slow and I am not doing any 3D.
    >
    >> Please try "mpstat 1" and see what the intr and csw colums say.

    >
    >
    > CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl
    > 0 0 0 0 408 307 230 7 0 0 0 372 4 0 0 96
    > 0 0 0 0 418 319 991 439 0 0 0 3437 52 2 0 46
    > 0 157 0 0 412 312 848 391 0 0 0 3059 98 2 0 0
    > 0 207 0 0 414 314 885 413 0 0 0 3075 82 3 0 15
    >
    > The difference in context switches when "idle" (first line) and when
    > doing something (the others) is big. Interrupts stay the same, though.
    >
    >> Maybe some output from "prstat -m 1" might be interesting as well.
    >> Who's up top?

    >
    >
    > PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/NLWP
    > 6361 ME 56M 48M sleep 59 0 0:01:10 10% Xorg/1
    > 6550 ME 96M 45M sleep 49 0 0:00:08 1,5% thunderbird-bin/3
    > 6546 ME 82M 29M sleep 59 0 0:00:09 0,5% gnome-terminal/2
    > ....
    >
    > It seems to be easy to get Xorg to take 30% CPU (just swap between
    > workspaces). No other process take any noticeable CPU.
    >
    > Is OpenSolaris faster? (at least the Gnome would be much better as this
    > is ancient).
    >

    Are you sure you are running the nVidia driver? I used one of these
    cards for a while without any of your problems. You should have
    something like

    (II) NVIDIA dlloader X Driver 1.0-8774 Tue Aug 1 22:08:36 PDT 2006

    in

    /var/log/Xorg.0.log

    --
    Ian Collins.

  5. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Jouko Holopainen wrote:
    > Dave Littell wrote:
    >
    >> Jouko Holopainen wrote:
    >>
    >>> Solaris works nicely, except that UI is slow, compared e.g. to Ubuntu
    >>> (6.06) or Fedora Core (4).

    >>
    >>
    >> Which UI, please?

    >
    >
    > Sorry. Gnome. Or, actually, "Java Desktop System" :-)
    >
    >> From what I've seen, the 5200 is a dog. This might be a contributor,
    >> but...

    >
    >
    > Yes, I agree, 5200 is slow. But not this slow and I am not doing any 3D.
    >
    >> Please try "mpstat 1" and see what the intr and csw colums say.

    >
    >
    > CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl
    > 0 0 0 0 408 307 230 7 0 0 0 372 4 0 0 96
    > 0 0 0 0 418 319 991 439 0 0 0 3437 52 2 0 46
    > 0 157 0 0 412 312 848 391 0 0 0 3059 98 2 0 0
    > 0 207 0 0 414 314 885 413 0 0 0 3075 82 3 0 15
    >
    > The difference in context switches when "idle" (first line) and when
    > doing something (the others) is big. Interrupts stay the same, though.
    >
    >> Maybe some output from "prstat -m 1" might be interesting as well.
    >> Who's up top?

    >
    >
    > PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/NLWP
    > 6361 ME 56M 48M sleep 59 0 0:01:10 10% Xorg/1
    > 6550 ME 96M 45M sleep 49 0 0:00:08 1,5% thunderbird-bin/3
    > 6546 ME 82M 29M sleep 59 0 0:00:09 0,5% gnome-terminal/2
    > ...
    >
    > It seems to be easy to get Xorg to take 30% CPU (just swap between
    > workspaces). No other process take any noticeable CPU.
    >
    > Is OpenSolaris faster? (at least the Gnome would be much better as this
    > is ancient).
    >


    All this looks pretty much OK to me. I'm afraid that this is the
    JDS (Java Does (it) Slow) effect...sorry. :-{

    I've used JDS on dual Xeon 2.8G machines and it still feels slow.

    Ian's suggestion that you may not have the NVIDIA driver will
    definitely make a difference. I hope it's enough.


    Good luck,
    Dave

  6. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Ian Collins wrote:
    > Are you sure you are running the nVidia driver?


    Yes. It improved situation a litle, but "not enough".

    > I used one of these
    > cards for a while without any of your problems. You should have
    > something like
    >
    > (II) NVIDIA dlloader X Driver 1.0-8774 Tue Aug 1 22:08:36 PDT 2006


    (II) NVIDIA dlloader X Driver 1.0-8762 Mon May 15 14:13:23 PDT 2006

    Seems I've got a slightly older one.

    I'll check with the latest one soon.

    --
    @jhol

    http://iki.fi/jhol/decss.html

  7. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Dave Littell wrote:
    >
    > All this looks pretty much OK to me. I'm afraid that this is the JDS
    > (Java Does (it) Slow) effect...sorry. :-{
    >
    > I've used JDS on dual Xeon 2.8G machines and it still feels slow.
    >

    I must admit, my transition from KDE to JDS coincided with an upgrade to
    a 6800GT, so I haven't seen the performance using a 5200.

    If the OP can run Solaris Express, the Gnome 2.14 based JDS is a big
    improvement.

    The latest JDS form Express is quite snappy on a 7900GTX

    --
    Ian Collins.

  8. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Ian Collins wrote:

    > Dave Littell wrote:
    >>
    >> All this looks pretty much OK to me. I'm afraid that this is the JDS
    >> (Java Does (it) Slow) effect...sorry. :-{
    >>
    >> I've used JDS on dual Xeon 2.8G machines and it still feels slow.
    >>

    > I must admit, my transition from KDE to JDS coincided with an upgrade to
    > a 6800GT, so I haven't seen the performance using a 5200.
    >
    > If the OP can run Solaris Express, the Gnome 2.14 based JDS is a big
    > improvement.
    >
    > The latest JDS form Express is quite snappy on a 7900GTX
    >


    I too run a 6800GT with the NVidia drivers. The driver made quite a
    noticeable difference although it was not "huge". Since I hate Gnome/JDS
    with a passion I opted to use Blastwave's KDE packages instead (even though
    they are old versions and my Opensolaris is still an ancient snv_25). The
    primary purpose of this box is to run Sun App Server 9 and Netbeans 5.5
    beta 2.

    In my experience it seems that KDE is faster than Gnome. I have steadily
    better performance as long as I am in a KDE app, but the symptom(s) the OP
    indicated are readily observable in Firefox. Since Firefox uses a few Gnome
    libraries I figure it's just Gnome/JDS being slow having a detrimental
    effect on Firefox. I also don't see the behavior in apps such as xchat,
    xmms, etc., which are Gtk and not 'Gnomish. Since this behavior is confined
    to Firefox only, and it is the only thing I run that uses Gnome libraries,
    I have come to this conclusion.

    I'm really really not trying to start a flame war here, but I've used KDE a
    long time on FreeBSD and Linux platforms and really much prefer it. IMHO
    Gnome/JDS is a huge mistake and should just be ripped out and disposed of.
    Just a personal opinion of mine. I'm also anti having "X" anything on a
    server, but that's another story..., so these comments may be construed as
    only applying to "desktop" usage scenarios.

    -Jason


  9. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Jason Bourne wrote:
    > Ian Collins wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Dave Littell wrote:
    >>
    >>>All this looks pretty much OK to me. I'm afraid that this is the JDS
    >>>(Java Does (it) Slow) effect...sorry. :-{
    >>>
    >>>I've used JDS on dual Xeon 2.8G machines and it still feels slow.
    >>>

    >>
    >>I must admit, my transition from KDE to JDS coincided with an upgrade to
    >>a 6800GT, so I haven't seen the performance using a 5200.
    >>
    >>If the OP can run Solaris Express, the Gnome 2.14 based JDS is a big
    >>improvement.
    >>
    >>The latest JDS form Express is quite snappy on a 7900GTX
    >>

    >
    >
    > I too run a 6800GT with the NVidia drivers. The driver made quite a
    > noticeable difference although it was not "huge". Since I hate Gnome/JDS
    > with a passion I opted to use Blastwave's KDE packages instead (even though
    > they are old versions and my Opensolaris is still an ancient snv_25). The
    > primary purpose of this box is to run Sun App Server 9 and Netbeans 5.5
    > beta 2.
    >

    Upgrade, the new JDS is a significant improvement.

    --
    Ian Collins.

  10. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Jason Bourne wrote:
    > In my experience it seems that KDE is faster than Gnome. I have steadily
    > better performance as long as I am in a KDE app, but the symptom(s) the OP
    > indicated are readily observable in Firefox. Since Firefox uses a few Gnome
    > libraries I figure it's just Gnome/JDS being slow having a detrimental
    > effect on Firefox. I also don't see the behavior in apps such as xchat,
    > xmms, etc., which are Gtk and not 'Gnomish. Since this behavior is confined
    > to Firefox only, and it is the only thing I run that uses Gnome libraries,
    > I have come to this conclusion.


    Well, I (== OP) thought it might be because Firefox is 32 bit
    application, and most others are not (mahjong is snappy). OTOH
    gnome-terminal is slow, but I have heard it is crap.

    But nothing explains the mouse cursor, which does not move smoothly.
    Extremely annoying.

    (not getting into flame war)

    --
    @jhol

    http://iki.fi/jhol/decss.html

  11. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Ian Collins wrote:
    > Upgrade, the new JDS is a significant improvement.


    Good to know.

    Sheesh, it seems Solaris Express now has b49, and I just downloaded b47
    maybe a week ago ...

    Actually I "must" upgrade anyway as I want to run BrandZ.

    Thanks for everybody!

    --
    @jhol

    http://iki.fi/jhol/decss.html

  12. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    quoting Ian Collins (Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:23:15 +1300):
    > I must admit, my transition from KDE to JDS coincided with an upgrade to
    > a 6800GT, so I haven't seen the performance using a 5200.
    >
    > If the OP can run Solaris Express, the Gnome 2.14 based JDS is a big
    > improvement.
    >
    > The latest JDS form Express is quite snappy on a 7900GTX


    Binary upgrading from solaris 10 6/06 to solaris express will not be
    possible, I presume. I guess I have to start over then or wait for a newer
    release from sun?

    --
    dick -- http://nagual.nl/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE
    ++ Running FreeBSD 6.1 +++ Solaris 10 6/06 ++

  13. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
    > quoting Ian Collins (Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:23:15 +1300):
    >
    >>I must admit, my transition from KDE to JDS coincided with an upgrade to
    >>a 6800GT, so I haven't seen the performance using a 5200.
    >>
    >>If the OP can run Solaris Express, the Gnome 2.14 based JDS is a big
    >>improvement.
    >>
    >>The latest JDS form Express is quite snappy on a 7900GTX

    >
    >
    > Binary upgrading from solaris 10 6/06 to solaris express will not be
    > possible, I presume. I guess I have to start over then or wait for a newer
    > release from sun?
    >

    Binary upgrading of what? You can (live) upgrade form Solaris 10 to
    Express.

    --
    Ian Collins.

  14. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish


    Ian Collins wrote:
    > Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
    > > quoting Ian Collins (Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:23:15 +1300):
    > >>I must admit, my transition from KDE to JDS coincided with an upgrade to
    > >>a 6800GT, so I haven't seen the performance using a 5200.
    > >>If the OP can run Solaris Express, the Gnome 2.14 based JDS is a big
    > >>improvement.
    > >>The latest JDS form Express is quite snappy on a 7900GTX

    > > Binary upgrading from solaris 10 6/06 to solaris express will not be
    > > possible, I presume. I guess I have to start over then or wait for a newer
    > > release from sun?

    > Binary upgrading of what? You can (live) upgrade form Solaris 10 to
    > Express.


    and you can do CD, DVD, jumpstart installs... Who knows what that
    meant.
    Heck I even did it in VMWare workstation this week using an iso image...


  15. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Jouko Holopainen kirjoitti:
    > Ian Collins wrote:
    >> Upgrade, the new JDS is a significant improvement.

    >
    > Good to know.


    I now have b50 and X is considerably faster.

    But still the most annoying bug is left: the mouse. It does no move
    smoothly, but stops whenever e.g. Firefox is drawing. The stop time is
    very small (maybe 30-50ms) and the mouse do "catch up", but the
    behaviour is extremely annoying.

    Where could the problem be? Does anybody else have same problem?

    --
    @jhol

    http://iki.fi/jhol/decss.html

  16. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    Jouko Holopainen wrote:

    > But still the most annoying bug is left: the mouse. It does no move
    > smoothly, but stops whenever e.g. Firefox is drawing. The stop time is
    > very small (maybe 30-50ms) and the mouse do "catch up", but the
    > behaviour is extremely annoying.
    >
    > Where could the problem be? Does anybody else have same problem?


    I see this, too, and it looks like a scheduler problem to me:
    Any load can cause the mouse to "hang" for a sec. I even tried
    switching between PS/2 and USB mouses to no avail.

    A good test case (at least for my configuration) is this web page,
    viewed in Firefox:

    http://thunar.xfce.org/pwiki/

    As soon as the mouse cursor enters or leaves the picture context
    switches
    go up from 300-500 to about 1000-1200 and the mouse hangs for 100ms
    or even more.

    As you said: Annoying. Any help appreciated.

    Rob.


  17. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    rockpiper@gmail.com wrote:

    > As you said: Annoying. Any help appreciated.


    Option "XaaNoOffscreenPixmaps"

    in xorg.conf's device sections seems to work around this issue ;-)

    Rob.


  18. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    rockpiper@gmail.com wrote:

    [snip]
    > Option "XaaNoOffscreenPixmaps"
    >
    > in xorg.conf's device sections seems to work around this issue ;-)
    >
    > Rob.


    Very cool! I'll definitely be giving it a try when I get back to the Solaris
    box. So it seems to be an "X" problem as opposed to OS. And I agree that
    while not a "showstopper" it is very annoying. :-)

    Thanks!

    -Jason


  19. Re: Solaris 10 (06/06) sluggish

    rockpiper@gmail.com kirjoitti:
    > rockpiper@gmail.com wrote:
    >
    >> As you said: Annoying. Any help appreciated.

    >
    > Option "XaaNoOffscreenPixmaps"
    > in xorg.conf's device sections seems to work around this issue ;-)


    Thanks! This helps a lot, although it does not completely remove the
    problem (of stopping mouse).

    I remember in the past, 10 years ago, the Solaris sheduler was very
    smart and gave X priority over other tasks. Apparently it no longer does :-(

    The annoyance factor was showstopper to me, I almost moved to another OS
    without the problem. The behaviour is still beyond comprehension.

    --
    @jhol

    http://iki.fi/jhol/decss.html

+ Reply to Thread