On 17/02/07, Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 12:36:00PM -0500, R. Fumione wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am using OpenBSD on server since few years now, and I am very happy
> > with it's easy maintenance and it's stability. I want to try on
> > desktop, and I am having trouble.
> >
> > Everything is much slower than existing Linux system. For example,
> > Firefox takes 3-5 seconds to start on Linux but ~10 seconds on
> > OpenBSD on same machine!
> >
> > I tried compiler optimizations but those didn't help. Any suggestions?
> > Please cc replies to me also as I am not on misc. Thanks.
> >
> > Fumione
> >
> > (Note: please do not tell me change to lighter window manager. I
> > would like to use same environment or stay with Linux. Thanks.)
>
> I believe the standard response to any comparison "use Linux if you're
> happy with it". Since you've already received that, here is an attempt
> to do the question a little more justice. (However, it boils down to 'it
> doesn't matter if FF loads a little slower, as long as it runs equally
> fast').
>
> Most modern Linux distributions optimize dynamic library load using
> prelinking; 4.0 and later have a comparable idea implemented
> ('prebind'), but in a way that does not interfere with OpenBSD's
> security features. This is not enabled by default (I'm not sure why not,
> and would be very grateful if anybody would tell me, BTW), but can be
> enabled using `ldconfig -P /usr/bin /usr/sbin /usr/local/bin
> /usr/local/sbin /usr/X11R6/bin'. This should result in a noticeable
> speed increase, especially on programs with lots of loaded libraries -
> and look in /usr/local/mozilla-firefox to see that FF does have 'lots of
> loaded libraries'!
> Of course, it would be a good idea to know why it's not the default
> first. Also note that, if I remember correctly, prebind won't help if
> you use a nonstandard LD_LIBRARY_PATH, as FF does... so the command
> listed before is likely to work for just about every *other* program.
>
> Another aspect is that Linux is much more aggressive in caching data
> from disk; if the amount of data read, the amount of work done in
> between, and the amount of RAM is such that Linux can get most data from
> its memory cache while OpenBSD has to read most of it from disk, Linux
> will be a *lot* faster. Of course, you would only see this effect if you
> started Firefox twice without doing much in between.
>
> Both of those could explain why FF loads slower. If either of those is
> the big culprit, though, FF should run just as fast (slow) as it ever
> did, and since you're not likely to start it that often, I'd be inclined
> to say it isn't that big an issue.
>
> If a comparable slowdown is found in running FF, that would be a
> problem. There are many variables there, of course... a dmesg might be
> helpful, for instance.
>
> Aggressive compiler optimizations are not generally a good idea. The
> developers believe they are an unnecessary source of bugs, and since
> many optimizations are not enabled by default, there is not quite as
> much opportunity to find bugs in them. Plus, no amount of fiddling is
> likely to double speed.
>
> Since you didn't mention what you are using at the moment, I can't very
> well tell you to switch to a lighter window manager, can I? Ion *is*
> nice, though... ;-)
>
> Joachim
>
>
Now that's what I call a helpful answer
Jeff
