Linux Mint 20.2: Slow Boot Time

[esteban0011]

Running Linux Mint 20.2 (XFCE) on desktop i5 4570 16gb ram, WD 7200rpm mechanical disk, nvidia 1650 4gb. All updates applied.

Off to login screen: 1 minute, 41 seconds
Thanks, guys!

Almost same thread as viewtopic.php?t=344430 but not the same. Allways the same boot time.

[Portreve]

Others here would likely ask you to post the output of various commands. I'm going to take a different approach.

1. What do you have connected to your computer?
2. Was this a fresh install of LM 20.2, or an upgrade from a previous version?
3. If this is a fresh install, was it a clean install? In this case, what I mean by "clean" is did you wipe the drive yourself before beginning the setup and installation process?

Personally, I always recommend using gparted to blow away all the partitions and redo the partition table itself, and then and only then begin a fresh installation process, which itself could go a couple different ways depending on if you're dual-booting or not.

Most of us on LMF are used to running LM from various types of SSD (whether an actual SSD or an M.2 module) and so for us a boot time of just a few seconds is the norm. Spinning disks are and always will be a lot slower, though in principle shouldn't be as slow as what you're experiencing.

[esteban0011]

Others here would likely ask you to post the output of various commands. I'm going to take a different approach.

1. What do you have connected to your computer?

Nothing connected to the desktop.

[*] Was this a fresh install of LM 20.2, or an upgrade from a previous version?

Fresh one.

[*] If this is a fresh install, was it a clean install? In this case, what I mean by "clean" is did you wipe the drive yourself before beginning the setup and installation process?[/list]

Yes, i was a clean one. I erased the entire hard drive and installed from scratch using linux mint live USB.

Personally, I always recommend using gparted to blow away all the partitions and redo the partition table itself, and then and only then begin a fresh installation process, which itself could go a couple different ways depending on if you're dual-booting or not.

I came from windows 10. I deleted it forever when I met linux mint

Most of us on LMF are used to running LM from various types of SSD (whether an actual SSD or an M.2 module) and so for us a boot time of just a few seconds is the norm. Spinning disks are and always will be a lot slower, though in principle shouldn't be as slow as what you're experiencing.

I know it but I don't want to buy an SSD at the moment. Also if I have to buy new devices I would stay with windows

Thanks for the answer!

[Aztaroth]

Hi,
Please post summary boot analysis :

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze

to see where your system keeps waiting.

and system info :

Code: Select all

inxi -Fxxxz

to see how LM deals with your hardware

[esteban0011]

Hi,
Please post summary boot analysis :

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze

to see where your system keeps waiting.

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze
Startup finished in 4.433s (kernel) + 1min 1.650s (userspace) = 1min 6.083s 
graphical.target reached after 1min 1.640s in userspace

and system info :

Code: Select all

inxi -Fxxxz

to see how LM deals with your hardware

Code: Select all

inxi -Fxxxz
System:
  Kernel: 5.4.0-84-generic x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 9.3.0 
  Desktop: Xfce 4.16.0 tk: Gtk 3.24.20 info: xfce4-panel wm: xfwm4 
  dm: LightDM 1.30.0 Distro: Linux Mint 20.2 Uma base: Ubuntu 20.04 focal 
Machine:
  Type: Desktop Mobo: MSI model: H81M-E33 (MS-7817) v: 1.0 serial: <filter> 
  BIOS: American Megatrends v: 6.7 date: 04/21/2015 
CPU:
  Topology: Quad Core model: Intel Core i5-4570 bits: 64 type: MCP 
  arch: Haswell rev: 3 L2 cache: 6144 KiB 
  flags: avx avx2 lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx 
  bogomips: 25601 
  Speed: 1500 MHz min/max: 800/3600 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 1118 2: 1158 
  3: 1170 4: 1112 
Graphics:
  Device-1: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v3/4th Gen Core Processor Integrated Graphics 
  vendor: Micro-Star MSI driver: i915 v: kernel bus ID: 00:02.0 
  chip ID: 8086:0412 
  Device-2: NVIDIA TU117 [GeForce GTX 1650] vendor: Micro-Star MSI 
  driver: nvidia v: 470.63.01 bus ID: 01:00.0 chip ID: 10de:1f82 
  Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.11 driver: modesetting,nvidia 
  unloaded: fbdev,nouveau,vesa resolution: 1920x1080~60Hz 
  OpenGL: renderer: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650/PCIe/SSE2 
  v: 4.6.0 NVIDIA 470.63.01 direct render: Yes 
Audio:
  Device-1: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v3/4th Gen Core Processor HD Audio 
  vendor: Micro-Star MSI driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 00:03.0 
  chip ID: 8086:0c0c 
  Device-2: Intel 8 Series/C220 Series High Definition Audio 
  vendor: Micro-Star MSI driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 00:1b.0 
  chip ID: 8086:8c20 
  Device-3: NVIDIA vendor: Micro-Star MSI driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel 
  bus ID: 01:00.1 chip ID: 10de:10fa 
  Sound Server: ALSA v: k5.4.0-84-generic 
Network:
  Device-1: Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet 
  vendor: Micro-Star MSI driver: r8169 v: kernel port: d000 bus ID: 03:00.0 
  chip ID: 10ec:8168 
  IF: enp3s0 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter> 
Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 996.73 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (5.3%) 
  ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Western Digital model: WD3200AAKS-00VYA0 
  size: 298.09 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: 1B02 scheme: MBR 
  ID-2: /dev/sdb vendor: Western Digital model: WD7500BPVT-16HXZT1 
  size: 698.64 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s rotation: 5400 rpm serial: <filter> 
  rev: 1A01 scheme: MBR 
Partition:
  ID-1: / size: 290.95 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (18.2%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/dm-0 
  ID-2: swap-1 size: 976.0 MiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/dm-1 
Sensors:
  System Temperatures: cpu: 37.0 C mobo: N/A gpu: nvidia temp: 28 C 
  Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A gpu: nvidia fan: 35% 
Info:
  Processes: 204 Uptime: 1h 04m Memory: 15.46 GiB used: 1.78 GiB (11.5%) 
  Init: systemd v: 245 runlevel: 5 Compilers: gcc: 9.3.0 alt: 9 Shell: bash 
  v: 5.0.17 running in: xfce4-terminal inxi: 3.0.38 

thanks!

[DAMIEN1307]

Off to login screen: 1 minute, 41 seconds

If you could post the following code answers for me, it just may tell us what we need to see to help you cut down the bootup time...DAMIEN

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze blame

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze critical-chain

[esteban0011]

Off to login screen: 1 minute, 41 seconds

If you could post the following code answers for me, it just may tell us what we need to see to help you cut down the bootup time...DAMIEN

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze blame

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze blame
47.860s vboxadd.service                                      
43.243s plymouth-quit-wait.service                           
18.404s mysql.service                                        
11.761s NetworkManager-wait-online.service                   
10.134s networkd-dispatcher.service                          
 9.791s accounts-daemon.service                              
 9.566s udisks2.service                                      
 6.941s polkit.service                                       
 6.902s NetworkManager.service                               
 6.570s avahi-daemon.service                                 
 5.294s thermald.service                                     
 5.293s systemd-logind.service                               
 4.840s wpa_supplicant.service                               
 4.755s ubuntu-system-adjustments.service                    
 4.550s ModemManager.service                                 
 3.723s dev-mapper-vgmint\x2droot.device                     
 3.529s apt-daily-upgrade.service                            
 2.780s gpu-manager.service                                  
 2.730s grub-common.service                                  
 2.694s systemd-resolved.service                             
 2.569s colord.service                                       
 2.515s nvidia-persistenced.service                          
 2.303s rsyslog.service                                      
lines 1-23...skipping...
47.860s vboxadd.service                                      
43.243s plymouth-quit-wait.service                           
18.404s mysql.service                                        
11.761s NetworkManager-wait-online.service                   
10.134s networkd-dispatcher.service                          
 9.791s accounts-daemon.service                              
 9.566s udisks2.service                                      
 6.941s polkit.service                                       
 6.902s NetworkManager.service                               
 6.570s avahi-daemon.service                                 
 5.294s thermald.service                                     
 5.293s systemd-logind.service                               
 4.840s wpa_supplicant.service                               
 4.755s ubuntu-system-adjustments.service                    
 4.550s ModemManager.service                                 
 3.723s dev-mapper-vgmint\x2droot.device                     
 3.529s apt-daily-upgrade.service                            
 2.780s gpu-manager.service                                  
 2.730s grub-common.service                                  
 2.694s systemd-resolved.service                             
 2.569s colord.service                                       
 2.515s nvidia-persistenced.service                          
 2.303s rsyslog.service                                      
 2.158s systemd-journal-flush.service                        
 2.149s ntp.service                                          
 2.045s alsa-restore.service                                 
 1.460s systemd-udevd.service                                
 1.356s apparmor.service                                     
 1.269s networking.service                                   
 1.247s e2scrub_reap.service                                 
 1.145s virtualbox.service                                   
 1.045s systemd-modules-load.service                         
  989ms lm-sensors.service                                   
  922ms lightdm.service                                      
  802ms systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service                       
  768ms pppd-dns.service                                     
  759ms user@1000.service                                    
  653ms grub-initrd-fallback.service                         
  628ms systemd-sysusers.service                             
  621ms ua-messaging.service                                 
  548ms systemd-random-seed.service                          
  529ms systemd-udev-trigger.service                         
  505ms systemd-sysctl.service                               
  484ms systemd-tmpfiles-setup-dev.service                   
  470ms keyboard-setup.service                               
  364ms dns-clean.service                                    
  358ms lvm2-monitor.service                                 
  320ms systemd-user-sessions.service                        
  316ms ifupdown-pre.service                                 
  272ms systemd-journald.service                             
  253ms ufw.service                                          
  236ms systemd-fsck@dev-disk-by\x2duuid-BAFB\x2d5EF8.service
  219ms hddtemp.service                                      
  218ms upower.service                                       
  160ms systemd-update-utmp.service                          
  151ms kerneloops.service                                   
  131ms blk-availability.service                             
  122ms systemd-remount-fs.service                           
  122ms boot-efi.mount

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze critical-chain

Code: Select all

systemd-analyze critical-chain
The time when unit became active or started is printed after the "@" character.
The time the unit took to start is printed after the "+" character.

graphical.target @1min 1.640s
└─multi-user.target @1min 1.640s
  └─getty.target @1min 1.640s
    └─getty@tty1.service @1min 1.640s
      └─system-getty.slice @1min 1.639s
        └─setvtrgb.service @1min 1.589s +49ms
          └─systemd-user-sessions.service @18.021s +320ms
            └─network.target @18.014s
              └─NetworkManager.service @11.110s +6.902s
                └─dbus.service @11.108s
                  └─basic.target @10.999s
                    └─sockets.target @10.999s
                      └─uuidd.socket @10.999s
                        └─sysinit.target @10.870s
                          └─apparmor.service @9.513s +1.356s
                            └─local-fs.target @9.513s
                              └─boot-efi.mount @9.390s +122ms
                                └─systemd-fsck@dev-disk-by\x2duuid-BAFB\x2d5EF8>
                                  └─dev-disk-by\x2duuid-BAFB\x2d5EF8.device @9.>
lines 1-22/22 (END)...skipping...
The time when unit became active or started is printed after the "@" character.
The time the unit took to start is printed after the "+" character.

graphical.target @1min 1.640s
└─multi-user.target @1min 1.640s
  └─getty.target @1min 1.640s
    └─getty@tty1.service @1min 1.640s
      └─system-getty.slice @1min 1.639s
        └─setvtrgb.service @1min 1.589s +49ms
          └─systemd-user-sessions.service @18.021s +320ms
            └─network.target @18.014s
              └─NetworkManager.service @11.110s +6.902s
                └─dbus.service @11.108s
                  └─basic.target @10.999s
                    └─sockets.target @10.999s
                      └─uuidd.socket @10.999s
                        └─sysinit.target @10.870s
                          └─apparmor.service @9.513s +1.356s
                            └─local-fs.target @9.513s
                              └─boot-efi.mount @9.390s +122ms
                                └─systemd-fsck@dev-disk-by\x2duuid-BAFB\x2d5EF8.service @9.118s +236ms
                                  └─dev-disk-by\x2duuid-BAFB\x2d5EF8.device @9.117s

thanks

[Aztaroth]

Hi again,
A bit puzzled by this :

Code: Select all

Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 996.73 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (5.3%) 
  ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Western Digital model: WD3200AAKS-00VYA0 
  size: 298.09 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: 1B02 scheme: MBR 
  ID-2: /dev/sdb vendor: Western Digital model: WD7500BPVT-16HXZT1 
  size: 698.64 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s rotation: 5400 rpm serial: <filter> 
  rev: 1A01 scheme: MBR 
Partition:
  ID-1: / size: 290.95 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (18.2%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/dm-0 
  ID-2: swap-1 size: 976.0 MiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/dm-1

It tells us you have 2 WD disks about 300 and 700 GB, the small one being LM's / partition and the second one having a 976 Mb partition as swap and nothing else in the remaining 699 GB.
So 2 questions : why a 1 Gb swap partition ? With 16 Gb RAM, it's too much (won't be needed in normal usage) or too less (if you want to hibernate, swap must be at least size of your memory - add 1 Gb to be sure).
Why aren't the 699 GB used at all (neither partionned nor formatted) ?

PS : I'm not inquiring, just trying to understand if some settings are wrong of if it is deliberate with the idea for example to install another OS.
If not deliberate, please add disk infos to your next post with :

Code: Select all

df -x tmpfs -Th | sort -n

and

Code: Select all

cat /etc/fstab

[esteban0011]

Hi again,
A bit puzzled by this :

Code: Select all

Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 996.73 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (5.3%) 
  ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Western Digital model: WD3200AAKS-00VYA0 
  size: 298.09 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: 1B02 scheme: MBR 
  ID-2: /dev/sdb vendor: Western Digital model: WD7500BPVT-16HXZT1 
  size: 698.64 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s rotation: 5400 rpm serial: <filter> 
  rev: 1A01 scheme: MBR 
Partition:
  ID-1: / size: 290.95 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (18.2%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/dm-0 
  ID-2: swap-1 size: 976.0 MiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/dm-1

It tells us you have 2 WD disks about 300 and 700 GB, the small one being LM's / partition and the second one having a 976 Mb partition as swap and nothing else in the remaining 699 GB.
So 2 questions : why a 1 Gb swap partition ? With 16 Gb RAM, it's too much (won't be needed in normal usage) or too less (if you want to hibernate, swap must be at least size of your memory - add 1 Gb to be sure).

I did not put that 1gb of swap. LM put it.

Why aren't the 699 GB used at all (neither partionned nor formatted) ?

The second disk is a laptop disk that I use as a backup with files that I had in windows (files from work, some installation games, etc) and that is not empty. I can try disconnecting it to see if it improves the speed

PS : I'm not inquiring, just trying to understand if some settings are wrong of if it is deliberate with the idea for example to install another OS.
If not deliberate, please add disk infos to your next post with :

Code: Select all

df -x tmpfs -Th | sort -n

and

Code: Select all

cat /etc/fstab

No problem.

Code: Select all

df -x tmpfs -Th | sort -n
/dev/mapper/vgmint-root ext4       291G    53G  224G  20% /
/dev/sda1               vfat       511M   4,0K  511M   1% /boot/efi
/dev/sdb1               fuseblk    597G   299G  299G  50% /media/esteban/Disco 2
/dev/sdb5               fuseblk    102G    40G   63G  40% /media/esteban/CCB48201B481EE70
S.ficheros              Tipo     Tamaño Usados  Disp Uso% Montado en
udev                    devtmpfs   7,7G      0  7,7G   0% /dev

Code: Select all

cat /etc/fstab
# /etc/fstab: static file system information.
#
# Use 'blkid' to print the universally unique identifier for a
# device; this may be used with UUID= as a more robust way to name devices
# that works even if disks are added and removed. See fstab(5).
#
# <file system> <mount point>   <type>  <options>       <dump>  <pass>
/dev/mapper/vgmint-root /               ext4    errors=remount-ro 0       1
# /boot/efi was on /dev/sda1 during installation
UUID=BAFB-5EF8  /boot/efi       vfat    umask=0077      0       1
/dev/mapper/vgmint-swap_1 none            swap    sw              0       0

[Aztaroth]

I did not put that 1gb of swap. LM put it.

Ok. It certainly has its own space calculation.
By the way, the disks uuid being /dev/mapper means you chose to encrypt the LM disk (why not ?) and even the swap file.

The second disk is a laptop disk that I use as a backup with files that I had in windows (files from work, some installation games, etc) and that is not empty. I can try disconnecting it to see if it improves the speed.

Yes, I saw the fuseblk file system designed to make NTFS compatible with Linux.
What do you exactly mean with laptop disk ? Is it in an external bay (seems disconnecting it is relatively easy) or directly mounted in your system ?

[motoryzen]

Also if I have to buy new devices I would stay with windows

It doesn't matter if it's a new device now..or later. It is inevitable that certain software ( such as desktop operating systems...regardless if it's windows, Linux based..or even apple mac os based) eventually becomes slightly more....bloated ....over the course of time as tech evolves. It's a never ending race to ensure
hardware is always faster than the software and slow it down...overall. It's just the way PC tech has gone.

All of the above have been facts for literally decades now. I'm sorry to sound a little mean here, but facts are facts. Saying you would stay with windows just because you eventually had to buy a new storage drive of faster speeds makes absolutely no coherence or sense.

About the only distro I could think of at the moment that would benefit the LEAST when upgrading from a 7200 rpm hdd to a good sata gen 3 ssd today would be slackware ( such as Puppy Linux) or something else ultra small overall that can be installed into/designed to run as an installed OS permanent storage that can also be ran straight from a thumb drive with almost neck and neck overall speeds as Linux Mint can be in a sata gen 3 ssd.

Why choose to limit yourself?

But...more back on point here.

47.860s vboxadd.service

That's a pretty BIG culprit in my opinion given that a reasonably normal range of time when booting any modern os today on 7200rpm hdd is usually between 35 seconds to a solid minute depending on how much of the drive is consumed and possibly other factors.

The other thing I would try is doing a fresh clean install of LM but with NO Other storage drives connected other than your fastest drive and let the Linux Mint installation wizard auto setup everything like you did before.

You can always add back the 2nd hdd to use for swap space or whatever using the method explained here >> https://www.fosslinux.com/1064/how-to-c ... x-mint.htm if that is what you prefer.

Regardless, I would see if you can live without virtual box auto starting unless you use it that often/every boot up every time and just prefer it to be an auto start thing ( which..I can respect that too. I have plenty of autolaunching stuff including my email and internet browser), but if you cannot..again..regardless... replacing that old hdd with a good sata gen 3 ssd will make ALL the real difference given your cpu is still plenty fast enough.

Virtual box loading from a hdd is very noticeably slower than if it loads from a ssd. Again..sorry..but facts are facts.

[Aztaroth]

Also if I have to buy new devices I would stay with windows

All of the above have been facts for literally decades now. I'm sorry to sound a little mean here, but facts are facts. Saying you would stay with windows just because you eventually had to buy a new storage drive of faster speeds makes absolutely no coherence or sense.

That"s harsh an assessment. We don't know if our OP can afford it, if he's able to do the installation alone or needs to increase the bill to have the job done.
Of course, what you suggest will obviously improve his system, that's not debatable, but first the software/distro side has to be improved if we can : a SSD can also be 'slow' in a misconfigured system. The forum is full of gals and guys asking help for this. I just came here from a thread where the OP had a 2mn boot sequence with a Ryzen 5 and a NVME disk.

47.860s vboxadd.service

That's a pretty BIG culprit in my opinion given that a reasonably normal range of time when booting any modern os today on 7200rpm hdd is usually between 35 seconds to a solid minute depending on how much of the drive is consumed and possibly other factors.

The other thing I would try is doing a fresh clean install of LM but with NO Other storage drives connected other than your fastest drive and let the Linux Mint installation wizard auto setup everything like you did before.

You can always add back the 2nd hdd to use for swap space or whatever using the method explained here >> https://www.fosslinux.com/1064/how-to-c ... x-mint.htm if that is what you prefer.

Regardless, I would see if you can live without virtual box auto starting unless you use it that often/every boot up every time and just prefer it to be an auto start thing ( which..I can respect that too. I have plenty of autolaunching stuff including my email and internet browser), but if you cannot..again..regardless... replacing that old hdd with a good sata gen 3 ssd will make ALL the real difference given your cpu is still plenty fast enough.

Virtual box loading from a hdd is very noticeably slower than if it loads from a ssd. Again..sorry..but facts are facts.

Here, I mostly agree except there are other culprits too : a whole bunch in a range of 8-20s.

My first impression is that there are a lot of time-consuming services besides the 5400 disk (virtual box, encrypted volumes...) and we need to be sure they really need to be present or not. Disabling VB at boot if possible is definitely a good advice.

Perhaps at the end, I will share your conclusions and recommend either to let as it is or to consider a hardware upgrade, but now I'm thinking part of these slowdowns may have been present in any configuration.

[SimonPeter]

Hi again,
A bit puzzled by this :

Code: Select all

Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 996.73 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (5.3%) 
  ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Western Digital model: WD3200AAKS-00VYA0 
  size: 298.09 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: 1B02 scheme: MBR 
  ID-2: /dev/sdb vendor: Western Digital model: WD7500BPVT-16HXZT1 
  size: 698.64 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s rotation: 5400 rpm serial: <filter> 
  rev: 1A01 scheme: MBR 
Partition:
  ID-1: / size: 290.95 GiB used: 52.87 GiB (18.2%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/dm-0 
  ID-2: swap-1 size: 976.0 MiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/dm-1

It tells us you have 2 WD disks about 300 and 700 GB, the small one being LM's / partition and the second one having a 976 Mb partition as swap and nothing else in the remaining 699 GB.
So 2 questions : why a 1 Gb swap partition ? With 16 Gb RAM, it's too much (won't be needed in normal usage) or too less (if you want to hibernate, swap must be at least size of your memory - add 1 Gb to be sure).

I did not put that 1gb of swap. LM put it.

Code: Select all

cat /etc/fstab
# /etc/fstab: static file system information.
#
# Use 'blkid' to print the universally unique identifier for a
# device; this may be used with UUID= as a more robust way to name devices
# that works even if disks are added and removed. See fstab(5).
#
# <file system> <mount point>   <type>  <options>       <dump>  <pass>
/dev/mapper/vgmint-root /               ext4    errors=remount-ro 0       1
# /boot/efi was on /dev/sda1 during installation
UUID=BAFB-5EF8  /boot/efi       vfat    umask=0077      0       1
/dev/mapper/vgmint-swap_1 none            swap    sw              0       0

Try disabling swap by sudo xed /etc/fstab and commenting out the swap line (in your case, the last line) by adding a # in the beginning of that line.
NOTE: Don't do this if you plan to consume more RAM than your RAM capacity.

[Aztaroth]

Try disabling swap by sudo xed /etc/fstab and commenting out the swap line (in your case, the last line) by adding a # in the beginning of that line.
NOTE: Don't do this if you plan to consume more RAM than your RAM capacity.

I agree.

to OP :
You may even try to disconnect your 2nd disk after that, because swap is the only thing related to LM this disk had. This would at least give you an idea of how your LM hardware works.

[motoryzen]

That"s harsh an assessment. We don't know if our OP can afford it, if he's able to do the installation alone or needs to increase the bill to have the job done.

There was nothing harsh about what I said. Stating a fact in an apologetic beginning ..ISN'T being harsh. And besides...It's not like it was up to me that reality works that way.

I'm not here to walk on eggshells for anyone. I was nice about how I mentioned the facts. I cannot help nor have anything negative to do with against the OP's financial abilities/strengths. I'm also not going to look for something to needlessly take insult by either.

It's not like I said something rude like " man..just stop being a penny pinchy cheap a hole and buy an ssd maaaaan". Do you want to tell me next that telling a little kid to look both ways before crossing the street otherwise he or she could get run over..is harsh too? Get over yourself. I didn't say or do anything wrong here.

Trying to make me feel like a bad guy for stating a fact of consumer buying tech live in a polite manner is asinine. Move on with that junk.

[ironbark]

Off to login screen: 1 minute, 41 seconds

My Linux Mint 20.2 boot up was 1 minute 36 seconds with WD hdd. Changed over to WD ssd and now it boots to login in 42 seconds. Shutdown time 4 seconds.

[Aztaroth]

That"s harsh an assessment. We don't know if our OP can afford it, if he's able to do the installation alone or needs to increase the bill to have the job done.

There was nothing harsh about what I said. Stating a fact in an apologetic beginning ..ISN'T being harsh. And besides...It's not like it was up to me that reality works that way.

I'm not here to walk on eggshells for anyone. I was nice about how I mentioned the facts. I cannot help nor have anything negative to do with against the OP's financial abilities/strengths. I'm also not going to look for something to needlessly take insult by either.

It's not like I said something rude like " man..just stop being a penny pinchy cheap a hole and buy an ssd maaaaan". Do you want to tell me next that telling a little kid to look both ways before crossing the street otherwise he or she could get run over..is harsh too? Get over yourself. I didn't say or do anything wrong here.

Trying to make me feel like a bad guy for stating a fact of consumer buying tech live in a polite manner is asinine. Move on with that junk.

You misunderstood. I wrote the assessment was harsh, not your words. They were correct, I agree.
This

Saying you would stay with windows just because you eventually had to buy a new storage drive of faster speeds makes absolutely no coherence or sense.

wouldn't be the kind of help I'll expect when facing a problem. It may not be coherent for you, but perhaps for the OP it is.
Just switch place a moment (in imagination) with the OP : you're facing a problem and get that as part of an answer.
I too didn't mean insulting, all words were 'nice' and look how jumpy you became. Think of how others can become when using such assessments like the one I quoted.

And as I told already, browse the forum and see how many topics use a similar title with much more powerful hardware than this one. Banknotes can solve a lot, but not everything.

[fastdave]

I hesitate to ask questions on the Linux Forums, simply because their is a superior attitude which comes across, from the supercilious to the downright sarcastic. I am always asked questions so that it sounds as if I should know that (dickhead), or 'don't waste my time!'
It is always possible to answer a question politely, and reach to the level of the answer, perhaps a bit like Professor Ian Cox, or Professor Ian Stewart, who know their subject so well, they can pass it on to the common man. One who can do this, surely understands their science. In answer to the 'nasty nice answers' - When you truly understand the science of programming, your confidence will enable you to be mannerly. Untill then, try to be kind - if you have no time to waste, don't come here to be superior and show off.

[motoryzen]

That"s harsh an assessment. We don't know if our OP can afford it, if he's able to do the installation alone or needs to increase the bill to have the job done.

There was nothing harsh about what I said. Stating a fact in an apologetic beginning ..ISN'T being harsh. And besides...It's not like it was up to me that reality works that way.

I'm not here to walk on eggshells for anyone. I was nice about how I mentioned the facts. I cannot help nor have anything negative to do with against the OP's financial abilities/strengths. I'm also not going to look for something to needlessly take insult by either.

It's not like I said something rude like " man..just stop being a penny pinchy cheap a hole and buy an ssd maaaaan". Do you want to tell me next that telling a little kid to look both ways before crossing the street otherwise he or she could get run over..is harsh too? Get over yourself. I didn't say or do anything wrong here.

Trying to make me feel like a bad guy for stating a fact of consumer buying tech live in a polite manner is asinine. Move on with that junk.

You misunderstood. I wrote the assessment was harsh, not your words. They were correct, I agree.
This

Saying you would stay with windows just because you eventually had to buy a new storage drive of faster speeds makes absolutely no coherence or sense.

wouldn't be the kind of help I'll expect when facing a problem. It may not be coherent for you, but perhaps for the OP it is.
Just switch place a moment (in imagination) with the OP : you're facing a problem and get that as part of an answer.
I too didn't mean insulting, all words were 'nice' and look how jumpy you became. Think of how others can become when using such assessments like the one I quoted.

And as I told already, browse the forum and see how many topics use a similar title with much more powerful hardware than this one. Banknotes can solve a lot, but not everything.

OO OO..I gotta have the last word in a nitpicking contest. -_- I'm ignoring you now. Move on.