Re: Etch becoming slower than Sarge?

[andy <geek_show@dsl.pipex.com>]

Geoff Reidy wrote:

Marko Randjelovic wrote:
  

andy wrote:
    

Thanks Geoff. I had also read that during the course of my earlier
research on this issue. But ...

:~$ uname -r
2.6.18-3-686

Viola! 686 and still no 1GB mem recognised, only 3/4s (776400KB) of
it, as seen below:

:~$ free
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:        776400     732580      43820          0      36980     317528
-/+ buffers/cache:     378072     398328
Swap:      2931852         92    2931760

It would appear that I'm looking at either just accepting this fact or
will have to recompile my kernel, which I am a tad phobic about to be
frank.
      

Are you sure you have 1GB? What does BIOS report when you restart your
computer?


    

You can also install the dmidecode package and do something like this as
root:

# dmidecode |grep 'Installed Size' |grep MB

Which gives me:

        Installed Size: 256 MB (Single-bank Connection)
        Installed Size: 256 MB (Single-bank Connection)
        Installed Size: 512 MB (Double-bank Connection)


  

Geoff

The relevant excerpt from the output of dmidecode is:

Memory Device
        Array Handle: 0x0027
        Error Information Handle: Not Provided
        Total Width: 64 bits
        Data Width: 64 bits
        Size: 1024 MB
        Form Factor: DIMM
        Set: None
        Locator: DIMM0
        Bank Locator: BANK0
        Type: DDR
        Type Detail: Synchronous
        Speed: Unknown
        Manufacturer: Manufacturer0
        Serial Number: SerNum0
        Asset Tag: AssetTagNum0
        Part Number: PartNum0

Although the man page will identify as a bug that the info in dmidecode can be completely wrong (!), this does show that I have 1024MB of RAM - i.e. 1GB. So, somewhere betwixt BIOS and fired up Etch I have lost recognition for 250MB-odd of memory.