From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.36.127.135 with SMTP id r129mr6350013itc.48.1518848136941; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 22:15:36 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.157.95.135 with SMTP id g7mr313018oti.14.1518848136658; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 22:15:36 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!o66no662092ita.0!news-out.google.com!t6ni10itg.0!nntp.google.com!w142no661260ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 22:15:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.167.108.58; posting-account=bPTmZAoAAAC_6HP9XLKB9aAAxBa6BuOR NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.167.108.58 References: <1892f04b-0223-4060-90a7-91983f775f18@googlegroups.com> <752bb990-b70a-4fce-8cd7-91d4f8ee7ea1@googlegroups.com> <91e9a70d-0c7a-4577-a48f-8f31b60eadb2@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: How to optimize use of RAM/disk access ? From: reinert Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 06:15:36 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 2494 X-Received-Body-CRC: 4121384552 Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50479 Date: 2018-02-16T22:15:36-08:00 List-Id: Obs, you mean to try to use an external disk for swap space? (I use linux, = Debian). See if I can spend some days on hacking :-) reinert On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 9:18:29 AM UTC+1, bj=C3=B6rn lundin wrote: > On 2018-02-16 06:04, reinert wrote: >=20 > >My program is mush slower on my laptop than on my desktop. > >So optimization for a laptop seems to be somehow different as compared t= o a desktop. >=20 > Or that is just because laptops usually have slower disks. > 10-15 years ago or so an ordinary laptop would have an 4200 rpm IDE > disk, while a desktop would spin at 5400 rpm or even 7200 rpm. > And servers would have scsi disks at 10000 or 15000 rpms. >=20 > But now - a large amount of laptops have SSDs instead. And some are > faster some are slower. >=20 > So dividing into laptop/desktop for general disk access optimisation > seems strange to me. >=20 > If you run your tests on an external drive and compare the output > from both laptops and desktops - is there a difference? >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > -- > Bj=C3=B6rn