RE: 2.5.34-mm4

[M. Edward Borasky]

Borasky's Corollary 1: If you *can* measure it and it *does* exist, the
cheapest solution may still be to buy more memory, more disks or a faster
processor.

Borasky's Corollary 2: When you try to measure the performance of people the
way you measure performance of computers, you need psychological help.

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
mailto: [e-mail]
http://www.pdxneurosemantics.com
http://www.meta-trading-coach.com
http://www.borasky-research.net

Coaching: It's Not Just for Athletes and Executives Any More!

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of
Rik van Riel
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 10:39 AM
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Axel Siebenwirth; Con Kolivas; lkml; [e-mail];
[e-mail]
Subject: Re: 2.5.34-mm4

On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Axel Siebenwirth wrote:

> > I have seen that it used more swap that usual.
>
> 2.5 is much more swaphappy than 2.4.  I believe that this is actually
> correct behaviour for optimum throughput.  But it just happens that
> people (me included) hate it.

Time for a corollary to "if you can't measure it, it doesn't exist":

"If you can't measure desktop performance, our method of development
 will ensure it won't exist"

cheers,

Rik