Re: 2.2.x kernels and low memory levels

Chris Wedgwood (cw@ix.net.nz)
Tue, 27 Apr 1999 07:37:27 +1200


On Mon, Apr 26, 1999 at 07:42:45PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:

> It depends very much on the workload, but 2.2 tends to be faster
> for most things. Be careful _which_ 2.2 you use, as some of the
> earlier ones did have problems in certain situations.

Under what circumstances is 2.0.x faster than 2.2.x? using 2.2.6-ac2
I don't see this, although I've not tested thoroughly[1] with low-memory
(although initial indications make me think 2.2.x is no worse here).

-cw

[1] I'm using the `see how many people I can kill' quake2 test

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/