Am 20.09.2014 um 16:08 schrieb Mark David Dumlao:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Alec Ten Harmsel
> <a...@alectenharmsel.com <mailto:a...@alectenharmsel.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     On 09/17/2014 10:40 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
>
>     > Fact is if it's _you_ that seems to give a tweet about systemd
>     speed,
>     > so it's on _you_ to measure it, I don't really care what you
>     think. The
>     > fact that you think pid1's speed or resource usage might be a
>     big deal
>     > is very indicative on how badly informed you are in the first place.
>
>     I don't care about systemd speed. I really am completely ambivalent
>     about PID1; I've run Upstart, I've run systemd, I've run OpenRC, and
>     they all work fine. All I'm saying is that a common point in the
>     systemd
>     community seems to be its awesome performance (unless I'm reading the
>     wrong documentation and conversations), and burden of proof is on the
>     party making the claim.
>
>
> The thing is, that's a strawman. Volker is outright delusional about
> systemd people breaking into his threads and forcefeeding him Lennart
> facts like "systemd is faster". It's the exact opposite. Every time a
> systemd thread comes up, here come the anti-fanboys whining about
> "well why should _i_ use it? because it's _faster_?" as if we gave a
> crap that he did.

I am deluded? Who again posted systemd propaganda again?
>
> The burden of proof is on the party making the claim, but almost
> nobody is making the claim -to him-.

No, just on public mailing lists and fora.

True, speed is not a factor.

Except if you claim it is.

> The fact that he thinks systemd's speed is important already betrays
> how biased and narrow his thinking is on the topic. Most people don't
> even bother with bootup speeds that cut a few seconds off. Heck I
> tried to tweak my boot process with systemd and I had a hard time
> getting _even_ with Ubuntu.

so the systemd-fanbois that always masturbate about how systemd is so
much faster than anything else are actually lying?

Interesting.

If those systemd-fanbois wouldn't talk about how-fast-their-toy-is, I
wouldn't care about it. I only boot to replace kernels. I don't care
about boot time, as long as it stays under 5 minutes.

> Generally we care more about the fact that services have actual
> dependencies, are written declaratively, can be executed exactly as
> upstream recommends, don't have magic code hacks, are automatically
> cgrouped and thus have all child processes guaranteed killed on
> service down, that logs and STDOUT are tracked and searchable in the
> journal, etc etc etc. Every single one of those matters more than
> bootup speed, but yeah, we heard somewhere that you can tweak parallel
> boots to be faster or something.

and if your system breaks and systemd stops working - how do you easily
access those logs? Just a question. With other logging solutions it is
easy: cat, less tail... etc.

>
> Point is he's trying to paint the picture that systemd folks rattle on
> and on about its speed, but they don't.

except when they do.


Reply via email to