Re: Doesn't ANYONE know how to solve this problem ?

[Martin Andersen <s747 ii uib no>]

Brad Pepers wrote:

> <-- some stuff deleted -->
> > The problem occurs on THREE completely different
> > PCs, so it's not hardware-specific.
> > As I mentioned at the beginning of the text
> > (using rxvt as an example), all operations involving
> > terminal-emulators give me slowdowns. This is
> > especially noticeable when using rxvt, since it's a
> > little fancier than xterm.
>
> Could you please post what the hardware is.  Mainly CPU speed, memory,
> and harddrive type.
>

Sure, but I'm 100% sure that the hardware hasn't got anything to dowith this
(that's why I didn't post it).

Machine #1:    P5-225 MMX running Linux 2.0.30 w/AcceleratedX v3.1
               Matrox Millennium 4Mb 220
               32Mb EDO memory
               Hd#1: Maxtor DiamondMax 5.1Gb, Hd#2: Seagate Medalist 2.1Gb

Machine #2:    P5-200 running Linux 2.0.27 w/XFree-3.3.1 using S3 server
               S3 Trio64+ 2Mb
               16Mb memory (I think - was using it at work)
               Western Dig. Caviar 2.1Gb

Machine #3:    P5-166 running Linux 2.0.31 w/AcceleratedX v3.1
               S3 Trio64+ 2Mb
               16Mb EDO + 16Mb additional "Compaq-memory"
               (don't you just love the word "non-standard", it's
               one of those fun things that needs specifying MEM=32M to
LILO..) :)
               Quantum Bigfoot 2.1Gb (slow as hell)

All in all: Nothing that qualifies for major slowdowns using rxvt. ;)

> > Perhaps the word `slowdowns' isn't really describing
> > this situation very well - it takes more than
> > *10 seconds* to list /usr/lib (for instance), and
> > while doing that, it eats all available CPU.
> > In other words: SOMETHING IS VERY WRONG HERE!
>
> Can you please post the results of using "time" on you command.  Something
> like "time ls /usr/lib".  This will show exactly how long its taking and
> a bit more info.  Also please post the exact command you are using.
>

Allright, here's the output: (using `time ls /usr/lib')0.01user 0.02system
0:00.15elapsed 19%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k0inputs+0outputs
(80major+24minor)pagefaults 0swaps

But I have to add that it didn't take long when issuing the ls
command like this. It seems like it's the output to the terminal
that is slowing it down. And it didn't use colors, either.

Here's what i get when issuing `ls -alF --color=auto /usr/lib' :

0.03user 0.11system 0:09.13elapsed 1%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (94major+39minor)pagefaults 0swaps

As you see, the first output says "19%" CPU, and the last one only
1. But `top' reports 0% idle time while running ls and rxvt peaks
to 96.9%, according to `top'.

The "94major+39minor pagefaults" doesn't sound too good, either..