I am considering installing Linux on my workstation to develop and run fortran codes much faster than windows. I wonder if there is significant speed difference between Linux distros. Especially between Redhat and Ubuntu or Debian. I havent used any Linux distro longer enough to have an idea about its speed while running long codes.
View 5 Replies
nominate a disastrous distro from past or present that was simply AWFUL and what exactly was so bad about it?
View 14 Replies View RelatedI have a linux box set up as a multi-purpose server for my home with three Windows client PC's. The linux box is based on a slightly modified Slackware 9.0 distribution using Linux 2.4.20 and an unfortinately old, slow AMD processor with a miserable 512Kb RAM. The linux box serves the CIFS file system to the Windows boxes, runs the SQUID HTTP proxy, the Apache web server, a print server, does masquerading, mail serving and a very effective firewall using iptables.
This system, although slow, has run perfectly for several years.Let me say that again - This system works perfectly.I had decided that now is the time to upgrade the hardware, so I bought a Gigabyte LGA775 motherboard which has two 1Gb network interfaces on it, an ASUS 256Mb PCI-E display card, 2Gb of DDR3 RAM, an Intel Core2-Quad processor and a bunch of 500Gb SATA drives to set up a RAID5 array (but I intend that the system boot off one of several 40Gb PATA drives I have).I set up the processor, motherboard, display card, RAM, a SATA DVD Drive and a 40Gb PATA hard disk in a "breadboard" layout and installed distro 13.1, being careful to set up the static IP for the local network, dhcpcd to get an IP address from the cable modem (my internet connection) and to enable ip_forward in the network configuration.
Then I installed a script invoked by /etc/rc.d/rc.local which installed all the SAME iptables rules as my old Linux box. There was one minor glitch when I had to change 8 occurrences of "-d ! $LOCAL_NET to" "! --destination $LOCAL_NET" but that was no problem. I also set up /etc/resolv.conf, /etc/hosts , the BIND server files etc. etc. exactly as in the old box.
I am able to ping mirror.aarnet.edu.au (this is at the heart of Australia's internet hub network - if it's down the whole bloody thing is down) and have the system find the correct IP from the designated nameservers and contact that server with a return trip time of 35ms. I am able to run a telnet session from one of the Windows boxes and edit files on the Linux server. So both network interfaces work and I've got them the right way around.I am able to run FTP on one of the Windows boxes and connect through to mirror.aarnet.edu.au, although it seems to hang when I try a DIR (but then so does the old linux system).
I currently have the Ubuntu 32 bit 9.10 installed on my laptop. I wanted to install WinXP 64 bit using VirtualBox. My question is: will WinXP 64 bit run faster on Ubuntu 64 bit than it will run on Ubuntu 32 bit (my current OS)? Is the upgrade from Ubuntu 32 bit to Ubuntu 64 bit worth it for running a virtual Windows XP 64 bit?
View 3 Replies View Relatedaccording to this article i read, its definitely faster. this is what i read: Since 64-bit systems can process twice as many instructions per second as a comparable 32-bit system, 64-bit systems are definitely faster than their 32-bit counterparts. it was from this article link: [URL]... Is this true? I always thought it wouldnt make a difference, besides more memory addressing?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI put together a p4 that has 3 slots for ddr memory and the specs say maximum memory is 2 G at 400 Mhz or 3 G at 333 Mhz. Now, I assume this means that if you install a third memory stick, it will run at 333 Mhz. Is this right? Which would be better out of curiosity?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI am using Ubuntu 10.10 64-Bit Desktop Edition, and I am looking for a faster way to rip CDs, without having to resort to Windows. I try to rip a CD, but it takes 20+ minutes just to get the files copied, then another 5 or so minutes to burn the cd!I have a new SATA interface CD/DVD burner, so I know it is not the hardware.
View 7 Replies View RelatedI installed preload, I unchecked all startup applications, I uninstalled programs I wouldn't use. Any other tips for a faster Ubuntu?
View 9 Replies View RelatedI have windows xp professional installed and I have 256 MB RAM and 80 GB hard disk.I installed Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Desktop Edition alongside on windows on a formatted 12 GB C drive(windows on E drive).When I used linux it was very slow but my windows is running smoothly.How can I get normal and smooth speed on linux as I have it on windows.Will removing the windows speed up linux?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI am currently backing up my data but find that it takes way to long to do a rsync, it takes forever to just find the differences and transfer them.Out of 3 separate rsyncs the main one that is slow is my www.skins.be mirror directory which is 41GB and has 392,200 files, sorted into multiple directories. Which grows by around 100 every couple days.I think that something that would be able to track changes by inotify time on directories will speed it up since Picasa sure finds the changes fast when I open it and it is tracking over 26,200 pictures. I just don't know of a backup solution that does that.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI need to find a fast way to copy a folder containing about 2 terabytes over my home network to another Ubuntu machine.In the past I have used RSYNC over ssh, but this is far too slow for this much data (probably the ssh encryption overhead slowing things down)I have looked at using SAMBA, but this seems geared for a mixed Linux/Windows network. Also I don't know if SAMBA will be appreciably faster.
View 4 Replies View RelatedOne of the most common tasks I perform is browsing for files. I have always wanted my file manager to be lightning fast. That is, I open it and it loads directories instantly. No waiting, just opening them right away. This remained always a wish, as in Windows and Ubuntu on a variety of machines I always see that it takes a little while for the program to load directories. I am not talking about folders with thousands of files or anything special. However, I have seen others who have Windows (XP in this case), and their Explorer opens right away. Browsing folders is very much instant.
Is there any way to achieve the same in Nautilus? The other computer is not very modern or super fast, at all.
I have a laptop with SSD drive which I hoped would speed up this process, but this is not the case. On both my laptop and desktop I often see the 'loading' symbol, and files often appear after the folder view has opened (they just appear all of a sudden). This happens with folders I rarely visit but also with folders I often open.
How are others' experiences? Can Nautilus be instant? Is this a configuration tweak or hardware issue?
i run ubuntu 10.04 on my old pc pentium 4, 500mb ram ,how can ido for make faster..
View 5 Replies View RelatedUbuntu booting up from hibernation is not faster compared to complete start up. In windows, you can feel the boot-up is faster if you hibernate your PC earlier. But in ubuntu, i dont feel that, to boot up from hibernation, it takes quite long time, not faster than complete new start-up.
View 3 Replies View Relatedi have read some time ago the the outer parts of a drive are faster on gparted, is that the left side or the right one?
{consider this thread solved. i don't put the tag as i would like to know for future reference, but it is not actually needed anymore}
After installing ubuntu 9.10. It's now been a month or so from a fresh reinstall.
Currently for some reason at times my computer slows down where typing starts to lag.
Is there any software that would speed up the linux os. Like for windows there is softwares that would check the registery for errors and shortcut errors etc and fix them.
I use free software like that for windows and works well. I just would like to know if I can get something like that for linux. I know linux dosen't use a regsiter but just saying software that checks the linux system for any errors that could cause the computer to slow down.
I need a command to tell the alarm to start the playback of amarok on the morning, I also need a way to be able to see lyrics in amarok, and last, any tip on how to make the amarok launch faster? is takes like 5 min!
Amarok ver 2.3.0
Ubuntu karmic koala
Going to be setting up a local home server ("headless") for the following:* General file sharing for home network -- a portion of this will be for movies which are accessed via Popcorn-Hour and a second PC hooked to another TV* MySQL storage for home network (bills, misc info, bookmarks, code snippets, etc.)* PHP Server for php scripts i write* SVN* misc Databases for PHP dBase testing (SQLite and Postgre) * Virtualbox* backing up stuffI have a bunch of hard-drives of different sizes, buffer size and access speeds.
Hardware* m/b supermicro X7SBL-LN2* Intel Xeon X3360 Yorkfield 2.83GHz 12MB L2 Cache LGA 775 95W Quad-Core Processor* (2) (8GB in total) Crucial 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM ECC Unbuffered DDR2 667 (PC2 5300) Dual Channel Kit Server Memory Model CT2KIT25672AA667
* (known hdd) Western Digital Caviar Green WD10EADS 1TB 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s3.5"Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive
What would be the best way to set this up ?OS installed on fast hdd ?Virtualbox on fast hdd ?Movie storage on fast hdd's (mirror raided) ?As for raid, i plan on taking two (1TB) hdd's and mirror them for the movies and two more (smaller) mirrored for backup storage.Im pretty sure i would want the Movies stored on there own hard-drive (faster hdd with more buffer) so not to cause and "lag" incase the server is being used/access at the same time for another use (MySQL access or what ever).Currently the server machine is set-up using VMware which is where the current Ubuntu-server is installed to/on, but now i would like to have Ubuntu as the base and use Virtualbox as means to virtual hosting instead of VMware.
I just read about reiserfs being way faster than ext4. I am installing lubuntu 10.04 on a Pentium 4 3.06 ht 512ram. Ide 150g this distro will be use only for running a small counter strike source server the system already ave ubuntu on ext4 and win7. So my question are..
1- Can it install my distro on a reiserfs?
2- Is it better?
3- Is this different from other file system. I mean can it be logical?
Against my better judgement (since it's an MLC device) I ran scrub on the free space of my SSD, which writes dummy data to all the remaining space on the drive and then deletes it. After I ran it, I went from 250MB read to 267MB (the original benchmark when I first got the drive). I just depleted from the drive by writing all that data to it
View 2 Replies View RelatedI'd like open windows to reappear from the taskbar faster. There's always a delay of at least 1 or 2 seconds between clicking on a minimized window and it being restored.
At first I assumed this was a limitation of ubuntu, but I've realised since the delay is the same across the board, regardless of the application, which makes me think it's a deliberate setting.
Am I right - and if so where can I alter it?
Ok first off the write speeds are off the hook, 210MB/s on 5400RMS disks (5 disks in a RAID 6). However, read speeds are 68MB/s. I wondering first off, why? and secondly could this be an indicator of something not properly setup that might cause harm to my disks?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI like the new 11.04 ubuntu, especially the left panel. However, performance dramatically dropped when i did the upgrade. What I'm asking is, how do I improve the performance of Natty?
If I can't, how can I downgrade back to 10.10?
Lubuntu is nice - but it seems the LXDE version is not as up to date as Fedora LXDE Spin or even Debian squeeze with LXDE installed. I do like Chromium on Lubuntu though... its faster and a nice touch. I am looking for a lightweight 64-bit distribution for my main laptop (it is by no means "old" or "low spec" but I like that Lubuntu starts up in like 2 secs).
LXDE version seems not to be recent (esp in 10.04 version which seems to work more stably for me - with Nvidia drivers etc)64 bit install is currently a pain - requires first install of minimal CD or alternate CD both of which required wired Ethernet, then install of lubuntu from PPA. Native 64-bit support would be nice. Linux Mint LXDE, for example, is also only 32-bit.
It is rumoured that video processing is somewhat faster in 64-bit but the one application I have for video encoding (avidemux) is not. Tested against a stopwatch the 64-bit version is just as fast as the 32-bit one.
What applications take advantage of 64-bit cpu instructions so the 64-bit version runs faster?
Is there a way to make the 'loading linux...' Bios Data check faster or disabled? It is taking 3 times longer then the actual boot.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have a Dell Dimension 3000, Ubuntu 10.04. I often suspend and wake it throughout the day, sometimes as many as 10. Will this have adverse affects on the hardware's performance/longevity?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI was unsatisfied with the 40second boot time of lucid and was searching for a solution for a while but didn't find anything yet. But today I found a way to boot 10seconds quicker.Lucid is installed here as suggested by the installer:
Primary rootpartition (/dev/sda1)
Logical partition (/dev/sda4)
swap (/dev/sda5)
[code]....
I was wondering if there is any tool or program that stores a copy of frequently used files eg. Binarys, program library's etc. in memory so when they are requested by the OS they load instantly. I'm asking because I have a system with plenty of ram but very slow hard disks. Having programs like opera and java/eclipse load from ram would greatly speed up their start time. Ideally they would be loaded into ram in the background after I log in. Of course all writes made to these files would have to be made to the files on disk for obvious reasons.I don't want the entire OS in ram because it will not fit, just frequently accessed files.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI've just started learning how to use kismet and aircrack. I'm sniffing my own network to see how vulnerable it is. I'm using aireplay to inject packets, but the number of packets per second in airodump is only about 30 to 50. Is there something that can speed this up a little more? Shouldn't it be able to go faster than this? It's going to take forever to collect at least 300,000 IVs for a 64 WEP key let alone the amount needed for 128 WEP.
wireless card intel iwl3945. Everything works great except for the extremely slow speed of gathering IVs. Also, how can I monitor my network? If someone was using aircrack on me and sending packets, how could I observe that? What should I Google?
