Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

export LC_COLLATE=C export LANG=C cat big_file | sort > /dev/null Usally Linux sort does some nifty stuff to comply to Unicode equality rules... if you change the locale to C it switches to byte only... For a 1.4GB file the difference on my machine is 20s vs. 400s (!!!)


2

The answer is: You can not! Linux is no real time system. The idea of UNIX and therefore Linux, too, is to provide minimum answer times, while the system is shared between multiple users and system processes. Depending on when you start the command, you might have to wait for a important system process to give you your share of processor time. Further the ...


0

Check out Munin, it's easy to set up and already packaged in Debian: apt-get install munin as root will get you started with sensible defaults.


1

Try tload, which is typically installed by default: http://linux.die.net/man/1/tload ttyload is pretty good, too: https://github.com/lindes/ttyload


0

Commenting or removing the line: #define USE_RAWDISK 1 in lib/orcallator.se seems to have fixed the problem for me.


1

The -b option in tar was used to control the block size tar writes to a device, so that is exactly what you want. But -b 512 regarding the manual page tar(1) means a block size of 512*512 = 262144. All block sizes are valid that your device, you write the tar output to, can handle. In history this was needed for different tape drives the tar command was ...


2

The one thing that always helps me most with sort is giving it as much memory as possible, so as to reduce swapping, e.g.: sort -S 20G


1

Some extra debug information like getting the call stack and some other things like that that are needed by gdb for debugging will be enabled. This will have slight impact in the performance. But you will see this mainly by using the tools using which most of the code runs in the kernel space. e.g. check the speed of a file copy, creating multiple threads ...


0

Do you mean all processes started by some process (have the same parent PID)? If you have pgrep you can filter all the processes with the same parent ID: top -p $(pgrep -P 2069 -d,) If not you can filter all process ids through awk and use them with top -p: top -p $(ps -eo pid,ppid |awk '($2==2069){printf "%s%s",delim,$1; delim=","}') Change $2==2069 ...


4

You haven't found any reliable answer because there is no widely applicable reliable answer. The performance gain from multiple cores is hard to predict except for well-defined tasks, and even then it can depend on many other factors such as available memory (no benefit from multiple cores if they're all waiting for some file to load). For ordinary desktop ...


1

Some operations in GIMP will take advantage of multiple cores; others don't, but this is an active area of development and should be expected to improve over time if you keep your version of GIMP up to date.


3

Many applications aren't explicitly multi-threaded, so their CPU-bound tasks will indeed be limited to one core at a time. Modern web browsers, however, use (at least) one core per window, so if you have multiple windows open you'll benefit from multiple cores. More importantly, running Linux systems consists of many processes running, all taking turns ...


1

Browsers freeze typically when they hog memory. Since you are running in kiosk mode you can find out the ideal memory usage by the browser , and also the memory it is taking when it actually gets hung while you are observing it. Lets say it gets hung when you are working - just find out the memory it is taking by using ps -eo vsize,pid | grep <pid ...


0

There are soooo many factors that go into this. The NIC hits more parts of the board than you can imagine. Any set if instructions can come across the wire and hit a part of the driver system and bottle neck you down. You can take a singleboard 1200mhz single core and tune out the hardware to blow the doors off of and quad core 3600mhz. This truly is a ...


2

The distribution is mostly irrelevant here. You aren't at a scale where you need to squeeze every byte of memory and disk space. The one part that can consume a lot of memory is the desktop environment. You don't need a fancy desktop environment to run a single application. In fact, you don't need a desktop environment at all: just a bare X server and a ...


2

Unless you specify oflag=direct or conv=fsync, then the kernel buffers the data and so dd thinks it is done as soon as the kernel has accepted the last of the data, which may be a few seconds before it makes it to the drive. For small amounts of data, that can introduce significant error to the throughput estimate.


1

In general dd displays the time it took for the entire transfer and the speed is "amount of data divided by time it took". Basically it's the same you should get with time dd ..., no magic there. 40603811328 bytes (41 GB) copied, 459.645 s, 88.3 MB/s 40603811328 / 459.645 / 1000 / 1000 = 88.3373 Maybe you cancelled the dd at some point and restarted it, ...



Top 50 recent answers are included