Wow this is ignorant. Real-time on SMP systems is like coughing up blood from a syphilis infection, it's balls slow and gives you no benefit when running more than a single application as POS and Kiosks typically do to their user, and those systems use QNX, commercial spins of DOS, and not Linux. The chewing that Vista does is mainly initial and is directly linked with the Windows Search service and Ubuntu has Tracker which though lighter does the same grinding to your disks, as does Mac OS X with Spotlight.
The comments about shared libraries are especially stupid. There's still this notion that Windows because everyone seems to hate it, has no concept of shared memory, which is untrue. What modern operating systems report about memory is not accurate regardless of what you're running, unless you have a stock version of NetBSD or FreeBSD without a Window Manager and background services, you can't even begin to point out real use, it's a pointless manner to try and figure this out. Ubuntu is not RTOS, nor is any Linux variant except through manual experimental patches from non-default kernel trees with the exception of completely proprietary work done by Wind River and IBM with specific aim at POS pver all else. The manual stabs are without merit, many times I've heard the opposite regarding how GNU people assume people can figure out how something works from step debugging through their incompetent programs to find out how it works. There's no concept of ABI in kernel modules, and if you've read the reasoning it will just reinforce the hobbyist pencil-during-the-day and playschool at night mentality of your run of the mill GPL drug pushing code monkey with 0 social skills, no clue about real demand or markets, let alone usability in the developer sense or this thing called standards... (GCC breaks standards, it adds tons of crap on and still complains when Borland, MSVC and MIPSpro do things that are different) You're obviously not playing with a full deck. Sure Ubuntu is perceptually useful (I use it myself) but Linux is not a panacea so stop trying to shoehorn demands into the wrong tool. - James On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 07:01 +1000, Edward O'Callaghan wrote: > Sorry Simeon, > That is all miss informed bull sh*t ! > > * Ubuntu has *not* complied its kernel in real time mode as default. > * The RAM is not 'wasted' if it is helping your IO responsiveness > issues and as Desktops see very heavy IO usage these days then its > clearly a very good use of RAM. > * A real time kernel does *not* help in responsiveness issues but is > used for time critical situations such as embedded type systems and > will almost always preform extremely badly in a desktop situation > except maybe audio editing. > In answer to your question, yes you can put Solaris into real time mode using: > dispadmin -d RT which would be a bad idea. > * ZFS does not eat up all your RAM and you can limit it if you really must.. > * IO bandwidth is the number one bottle neck on any x86/x64 system, > end of story. > > Good luke writing a modern OS and software stack in ASM that is > non-portable highly architecture dependent and _then_ trying to debug > that. > > Oh and you didn't even email the list, you sent it to me. > Please have a *clue* instead of misinforming people. You may now thank > me for forwarding your email :p > > Thanks, > Edward. > > 2008/9/26 Simeon Nifos <archwndas at googlemail.com>: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Welcome to OpenSolaris. > >> > >> Tip: Some times x86 IO controller problems can come from a BIOS bug > >> making a SATA controller run in PATA (legacy mode). I seen this > >> before. Make sure you have a up to date BIOS. > >> > >> In regards to responsiveness. Pick a WM such a Fluxbox instead of > >> Gnome. You may just find that it frees up heaps of system time to do > >> more useful things. > >> > >> ZFS root will really help you as long as you have plenty of RAM. Make > >> sure to kit your system out with as much RAM as you can stick in it as > >> its so cheap today. I would say 2GB minimum, 4GB+ preferred. You _may_ > >> think this is a lot but modern software has modern requirements, your > >> really see the difference in regards to IO as ZFS will 'read ahead' > >> and cache into RAM, trust me ! > > > > And what happens Edward when you need the RAM for other things? I would > > definitely did not like to see my RAM wasted for making my filesystem faster > > unless I have to build up a server dealing with heave disk IO 25hours per > > day. > > Don't you think that having a file system which eats up all your RAM > > is something > > like WINDOW SVISTA is doing? Eat up all your computer resources just to > > show off or to push Laptop marketing further? Of course if I had 128GB of > > RAM > > I wouldn't mind unless I would try to run some applicationg needing RAM > > close > > to 120GB which is not that uncommon in the area I am working with. > > > > If you want responsiveness, consider seriously an operating system with a > > real time kernel. Linux Ubuntu derivatives offer a realtime precompiled > > kernel > > with modules as well. I do not know if OpenSolaris is realtime. As for the > > filesystem what people say is true. Caching into RAM will definitely > > increase > > responsiveness. I do not know however what will happen if power goes off > > suddenly. > > > > Keep also in mind that KDE and GNOME are crappy. FluxBOX is even more > > crappy since it offers nothing with an awful alternative. Consider CTWM if > > you want to minimize the WM overhead. It is far more convenient from > > FluxBox. > > A lilghter alternative than KDE/GNOME offering at the same time a lot of > > convenience is XFCE. Even lighter is Enlightenment and E17. Both are highly > > responsive and give you a completely different look and feel. > > > > There is more about responsiveness. One of main problems when it comes > > to rensponsiveness is the fact that a lot of shared objects have to load > > when an application which links to too many of them starts executing > > (firefox). > > Most Unix applications link to libc which is huge, The same code linked to > > a tiny libc library (there are rojects like that, others written in > > assembly) may > > become 10 to 30 times smaller in size. This means that we could have > > potentially > > the same functionality fitting in 10-20 times less disk space. Can you > > imagine ? > > an 10GB operating system recompiled to become 500MB in size? Yeah that's > > true. But nobody is deciding to start such a project. No huge DVD isos > > to download > > no caches filled up with crap, no too many huge shared objects > > (libraries) to load > > at start time e.t.c. Check the project www.menuetos.net. This is a > > responsive > > operating system you would like to try. Written in assembly enirely. Then > > you will understand what we are missing. > > > > There is something awkward about Solaris. This is JAVA along with really > > awful administration making your life hard. Especially if you come from > > Windows or Linux. Like any other Unix derivative documentation is awful > > as well. Unix guys are not bored writing 100 of pages of properties of their > > software but they consider really redundant to give a few examples, because > > they think they have explained in the manpage everything very well. This is > > not Solaris problem but a problem of UNIX community itself. Like a cancer > > that keeps growing. WIKI pages are trying to cure this but it is getting > > worse. > > > > Cheers ... > > > > >
