On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 06:30:25PM +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
> How could that be?
>
>
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/etoys/+bug/1009704>
> - Bert -
>
I don't know the answer, but I would be inclined to ask the reverse
question - is there any case in which using xshm produces a noticable
performance benefit? I could never notice any difference, so I never
paid much attention to the option.
My understanding is that the X shared memory extention attempts to
reduce data tranfer between server and client, but presumably at the
expense of the shared memory mapping activity, which I suppose might
have some bad effects on a small PC for one reason or another.
Dave
Locked
