Bionicpup32 extremely slow after running two days?

[timg11]

For reference here's the system in question:
What specific Puppy version? Bionicpup32 8.0
Computer make and model or specs? Inspiron 5000
CPU? Pentium 3 - 600,
Memory? system info reports 505024 kB
Graphics hardware? AMD
Network hardware? WLAN
How is Puppy installed? Full on sda2 a 26 G partition on a 40 G IDE drive sda2 created with ext4

It was running fine. Today I find the computer fan running at full speed. The system is extremely slow. Keyboard and mouse are delayed by around 30 seconds.
I finally got LXterminal up and ran top. It was about 30 seconds delay from pressing Enter to seeing any output, but the output itself refreshes at a normal speed. It's not like the terminal is connected by a 300 baud modem.

Load average is under 20%. The top CPU users vary over time and include Xorg, gtkdialog, ps-full, and retrovol.

Any ideas on what caused this failure? I'll try to do an orderly shutdown from the terminal and see if restarting helps.

[timg11]

After restart, everything back to normal. I'll leave the graphical task manager running in case it happens again.

[mikeslr]

Even applications you've closed may leave vestigial files in RAM and you only have 500 Mbs of RAM. Restarting-X often when convenient will clear RAM. Alternatively, either of these applications may help without the need to first close open applications: https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 559#p27559 and https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 645#p25645

[mikewalsh]

@timg11 :-

I leave my rig on suspend every night, so in practice I often have it running continuously for weeks at a time. I can't say as I've noticed any speed reductions over time.

But then of course, the difference between your Pentium 3 and my Pentium G5400 is about like that between a snail and a rocketship. I also have 64 times as much RAM, and that many gigs of swap scattered around the system.....

It's a totally unfair comparison, I'll grant you..! It's like comparing apples to oranges.......there's very few points of commonality to be found. But it's interesting to note that when Intel moved on from "Netburst"/"Prescott"/"Cedar Mill" at the end of the P4's run, they actually stepped back a generation to the PIII for an architecture from which to develop the upcoming 'Core'-based CPUs.....the P4's were an anomaly in Intel's roadmap, and were developed solely for one purpose; to achieve an ultra-high clock speed, and to rub AMD's collective nose in the dirt. Nothing else.

My ancient Dell Inspiron lappie, which died last year, was around 20 years old when she started pushing up the daisies. But, even with a Pentium 4 and 1.5 GB DDR1 RAM - although slow - I never noticed any kind of marked slowdown over time when running continuously for a few days.

Do you have any kind of swap set up at all? My guess would be that with so little RAM, even Puppy's relatively few background processes are slowly filling it up; even as little as a gig of swap would give the system some breathing-space.

It's just an idea, but worth investigating. Even if you DO have some set-up, perhaps it would be worth adding some more.....

Another Mike.

[geo_c]

@timg11 :-
It's just an idea, but worth investigating. Even if you DO have some set-up, perhaps it would be worth adding some more.....

Another Mike.

It looks to me from that htop output that @timg11 has 65MB of swap (If I'm reading it right) and it's all used there.

[mikewalsh]

@timg11 :-
It's just an idea, but worth investigating. Even if you DO have some set-up, perhaps it would be worth adding some more.....

Another Mike.

It looks to me from that htop output that @timg11 has 65MB of swap (If I'm reading it right) and it's all used there.

@geo_c :-

Ouch! Yup, you're right, mate. I hadn't actually read through what the image showed, and was solely going by a description of the issue (and mikeslr's comment about the amount of RAM).

That's not a lot of swap to play with, is it? Especially given that older, "resource-challenged" hardware like this is the sort that most benefits from having a decent amount of the stuff....

Mike.

[bigpup]

You have the kind of computer that you should only be running one specific program at any time.

If you want to run something else.

Shutdown whatever was running, before you startup some other program.

If it even needed to be running in swap and for sure, if it used up all of swap.

Whatever you were doing, had the resources maxed out.

A reboot stopped everything and got back to basic operation, of the running OS, only.

[mikeslr]

Good call, geo_c, about the swap. timg11, you've got a 26 Gb partition and but only 500 Mbs of RAM. You could use Menu>System>gparted to resize that partition and create a 2Gb swap partition. The 'Rule of thumb' was swap=twice RAM. I had a post on the 'Old Forum' in which I tracked down its origin and pointed out it was based on an analogy that might not have been relevant. There were posts on the old Forum by users who had 1 Gb of RAM and created an 8 Gb swap. The thing is, if swap is greater than what will be used you're just wasting space.

Rather than using gparted to create a swap-partition, there's a command to create a swap-file. But I'm not awake-enough to recall what it is. Linux will recognize all 'swaps' and use as much as needed.

[timg11]

@mikeslr Thanks for the suggestions about swap file. I agree the default is too small.
I followed this procedure to create a swapfile (not using sudo since not needed with Puppy).

Everything worked until the last step.

Code: Select all

# swapon /swapfile
swapon: /swapfile: swapon failed: Input/output error

So maybe swap file doesn't work with Puppy, and Swap partition is required?

@bigpup "You have the kind of computer that you should only be running one specific program at any time." Agreed, this is for educational purposes for a young family member to learn Linux and Python. It is on the borderline of usability, but seems to be responsive except in the slowdown scenario that motivated the OP. Hard to believe it was my daily driver back in the day....

[Fossil]

First, try and max out the RAM. Second, you haven't stated how you are utilizing Puppy over an extended period: is it browsing? If so, in whatever browser you are using, go into Preferences to control the amount of available cache, which otherwise does fill up the available space.

[timg11]

@Fossil, I did a bit of digging to see if I could add memory. It took a bit of work, because Dell has apparently re-used the name Inspiron 5000 in newer models, which is all that comes up in searches. I finally came to this site that informed me that the 512 M of RAM currently installed is the max the system supports.

Actually, I've done nothing over the extended period. I got Thonny running and set it aside for a couple days. I have not even tried a browser yet.

[mikewalsh]

@timg11 / @Fossil :-

Hiya, Fossil! Long time no see!

Timg11:-

I finally came to this site that informed me that the 512 M of RAM currently installed is the max the system supports.

You absolutely sure about that? How many slots does your 5000 have? Two?

I'll tell you why I ask......and I suspect Fossil may know this, too, because he also had one. My old Inspiron 1100 - now gone to the great bone-yard in the sky - would, according to Dell themselves, ONLY accept a maximum of 1 GB DDR1. Some time later, I came across a "white-paper" from Intel, on the 82845 chipset......and according to Intel themselves, that chipset would support up to 2GB DDR1.

So I experimented. I obtained 2 x 1 GB SoDIMMs. I fitted them in; booted 'er up, and.....bingo! It happily ran for several months with 2 GB. One of the replacement modules then went bad; I suspect because I picked up a pair of el cheapos off eBay. Normally, I stick with brand-name stuff like Crucial. I think if I'd bought a pair of decent modules she'd have carried on happily running with the full 2GB.

Moral of the story? You cannot take Dell's specifications at face value. They tend to err on the side of caution, and never max out recommended options. Yours may well be able to handle a full 1 GB, but Dell will never admit to it.....

So it may be worth digging further......capisce? (Mind you, since it's a Pentium III-gen laptop, that 512 MB is probably correct...)

UPupBB32 may just be too much for a 'puter of that vintage. Recommended specs ARE 1 GB of RAM for that Puppy. Tahrpup32 may be a "better fit":-

http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pu ... _noPAE.iso

Mike.

[Fossil]

@ mikewalsh. Hi-Ya, Mike! Yes, it's been a while. It is possible to go over the assumed memory limit with the old Dell's, although finding the memory modules at a reasonable price after all these years might prove problematic. On a side note, I still have the working Inspiron 1100 (the old 'Dell from Hell!') although now retired after a long and not very distinguished service as part of the keyboard is non-functional after a splash of 'Corrosive Cola' got spilt across the right-hand side. If that stuff can clean a toilet bowl, what chance does a computer keyboard have?

[timg11]

You absolutely sure about that? How many slots does your 5000 have? Two?

Yes is does have two slots.
Looks like this:

I was intrigued with the idea of expanding beyond the stated limits. I found the Intel 440BX chipset manual on archive.org and found the memory config options:

I can't find the data sheets for the memory chips, but I found one of the modules.
Looking at the bottom row, (ignoring ECC and the non-existent 3rd Slot DIMM2) we have two modules of 32M x 64 bits. Given there are 16 chips on each module, each chip provides 4 bits.

I know the modules are 256 MB, and there are 16 chips on each double-sided module, each chip is 16 MB, or 128 Mbit. 32M x 4 bits = 128 Mbits as the memory chip size. 128 Mbits * 16 chips = 2048 Mbits which brings it back to 256 Mbytes per module.

This Wikipedia article on the 440BX says "Limitations - This chipset does not support 256Mbit SDRAM..." So that seems to confirm that the current set of two modules with each holding 16 128 Mbit chips, would be the highest supported.

So based on the 440BX data sheet and the Wikipedia, I'm concluding that in this case there is no further expansion possible. If I've missed something, let me know and I'll try to dig this rabbit hole deeper.....

[mikewalsh]

@timg11 :-

Err... Hm. 440BX? Research is showing me the 82443. Umm.... Ah. I see....

O-kay. That's what was throwing me out. Just like the P4's 82845 was "known as" the 845G, so it appears the 82443 was "known as" the 440BX. One's an 'in-house', internal code, and the other's the official part number. Jeez. I wish Intel would just stick to a single part number like everyone else, and be done with it. Arrgh!

Also, what put the cat among the pigeons was the fact that this was a multi-generational chipset. It supported both the the P-III and the older Pentium II. Which in itself was unusual; whenever Intel move to a new CPU generation, invariably it gets a new chipset. Not so here, apparently. Which suggests the architecture was a lot closer in design than Intel would have you believe..! Perhaps not such an "advance", after all?

I'm inclined to go along with your summary, this being the case. I can't see an increase over 512 MB for that older-gen CPU; that was a bloody good amount for a laptop of the time.

I still stick to my recommendation. I think UPupBB32 is a bit much for that machine. I GB is the 'recommendation', along with at least SSE2s, SSE3s preferred. The P-III 'only' has SSEs.

The recommendation stands. Tahrpup32. I know it's nearly a decade old, but will still run up-to-date browsers with a wee bit of tweaking. The non-PAE kernel is fine for this machine; you're NEVER going to get 4GB + of RAM running here...

Mike.

[mikeslr]

About Puppys alternative to Bionic32, see this thread:
https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... 47#p100547

I mentioned two in the OP. dPup-Stretch has its own thread in the Mainline Subforum, https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/postin ... dit&p=1506. You can download Busterpup-Stripped from here, http://www.mediafire.com/file/ffsqqzardvbs6ll/file. It's discussed here, viewtopic.php?p=4070#p4070. You'll find the 48 Mb K-Office Suite I mentioned here, viewtopic.php?p=3412#p3412 dPup-Stretch was one of my all-time favorites. As noted, both will boot to desktop only using about 70 Mbs of RAM. I'd suggest trying dpup first.

Either may have this advantage over tahrpup: both should be able to run current firefox, seamonkey and palemoon web-browsers OOTB.

By the way: If you want to try out any other Puppy you can just create a folder on Bionicpup's partition, unpack an ISO into it and add a listing to your boot menu. Open another thread to 'Ask how'.

That partition is formatted Linux. So you can do a 'frugal' install and use a SaveFolder. The boot argument 'pfix=nocopy' with such setup makes RAM-Demand as, or almost as, little as a 'Full Install'.

[mikewalsh]

@mikeslr :-

Ah, cheers, Mike. I'd forgotten all about Radky's wee 'gem' called dPup 'Stretch'. Yes; that, too, might work better for Tim than UPupBB32. The latter's good, but it definitely benefits from more in the way of resources. And DPup 'Stretch' is a bit more modern than Tahr32.

We also have several SSE-only builds of Pale Moon ('New Moon', it's called). So a reasonably modern browser's a distinct possibility, too.

Ta!

T'other Mike.

[bigpup]

In Puppy Linux there is a program for making a swap file.

Puppy looks for a specific name for it, so use this program.

swap file
For frugal install of Puppy, it is probably the best, because it can be used on a none Linux formatted partition. You can put it anyplace.
However, very important that you defragment hard drive before making a swap file on a (Windows) Fat or NTFS formatted partition.
You could end up with a fragmented swap file which would not work very well.

In terminal:

Code: Select all

pupswap

is program to make swap file.
.

Screenshot(11).jpg (15.58 KiB) Viewed 1038 times

I am not too sure how swap would work, if you have both a swap partition and a swap file.

[wizard]

@timg11

This is as close as I could get to your hardware.

Hardware:
Compaq Armada E500
cpu=Pentium 3 @ 1ghz
ram=512kb

Puppy=bionicpup32-8.0+29-uefi.iso
install type=frugal on ext2 internal hdd partition

Running "free" command in terminal:

wnocopy.png (9.47 KiB) Viewed 994 times

Using pfix=nocopy, running "free" command in terminal:

nocopy.png (9.68 KiB) Viewed 994 times

Notice the increase in available ram.

Dpup Stretch 7.5 did about 10mb better, so maybe just a toss up.

As per @bigpup, with either, you can create a swapfile by opening a terminal and typing: pupswap

wizard

[galen]

We are assuming high load factor is lack of swap, it might be something else.
A stuck background process,
Gtkdialog ?
Initrd ?
Cron ?
Pkg pu?

[Phoenix]

Judging by the original shot of high system cputime and very little available memory of 15MB, its safe to say that it is memory pressure. You may find some hope in zram. It'll be slower still, but at least it may be usable by some standard.
So what you need to do is modprobe zram, echo zstd > /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm, echo 512M > /sys/block/zram0/disksize, mkswap /dev/zram0, swapon -p 1 /dev/zram0. You can stuff this into /etc/rc.d/rc.local

There is a possible parameter named backing_dev which can be used to write out data that can't be compressed. If so, echo <swap partition> > /sys/block/zram0/backing_dev Make sure to swapoff the swap partition as well. If not, just leave your swap partition as it is.

[timg11]

Hi all, thanks for all the good advice. It turns out over the holidays another family member had an old computer they wanted to dispose of. It is an HP notebook with i5 CPU and 4G RAM. It is much more capable, so the Inspiron 5000 is not worth messing with any more.

I created a new ext4 partition with the free space on the internal drive of the HP, and installed bionicpup32-8.0-uefi.
My bootable CD I created for the I5000 would not boot for some reason, so I created a bootable USB using Rufus 3.17p as recommended here.

I did the install to the internal HD.
Then I went to PPM to install Thonny. That worked fine before except for having to manually install the symlink to python3
This time I have a different result - many packages not available.
I'll post another thread since it's a different topic.

Edit - I figured out the PPM issue - although the network was detected and set up properly on the first USB boot, when I booted off the HD, the network was not configured. When I updated PPM, it silently failed and did not display any errors, so I thought PPM was up to date. Once I got the network connected again, then the PPM update worked correctly, and the dependencies were all installed normally.