2008/9/14 Tristan Wibberley [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 12:51 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
As an author of Prefetch, I cannot agree that it would not fix seeks ;)
Part of my implementation, not enabled by default as it is highly
experimental, is ext3 defragmenter which puts all
2008/9/12 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 09:35 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
Thanks. There are some rough edges in patches themselves which should
be straightened out. And the feedback on using prefetch was pretty
much non-existing.
What is the recommended way of
Olá Oliver e a todos.
On Friday 12 September 2008 10:33:17 Oliver Grawert wrote:
for jaunty i would like to propose to install bootchart by default
during the development cycle with an optional upload function to a
central database (with a first login question do you want to
participate in
Olá Mackenzie e a todos.
On Friday 12 September 2008 14:29:15 Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
I'm just reading my bootcharts, and those stop at GDM.
$ sudo gedit /etc/init.d/stop-bootchart
Look for this case, and add a sleep before the stop command.
case $1 in
start)
sleep 60#
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 8:00 PM, (``-_-´´) -- Fernando
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Olá Mackenzie e a todos.
On Friday 12 September 2008 14:29:15 Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
I'm just reading my bootcharts, and those stop at GDM.
$ sudo gedit /etc/init.d/stop-bootchart
Look for this case, and add a
Olá Mackenzie e a todos.
On Saturday 13 September 2008 15:59:16 Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 8:00 PM, (``-_-´´) -- Fernando
On Friday 12 September 2008 14:29:15 Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
I'm just reading my bootcharts, and those stop at GDM.
$ sudo gedit
2008/9/11 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 12:57 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
That's what have been done by Microsoft for XP - they had the goal to
bring boot time to 30s and managed to do it. Apparently they forgot to
do the same for Vista ;)
But as mentioned
2008/9/11 Krzysztof Lichota [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As an author of Prefetch, I cannot agree that it would not fix seeks ;)
Part of my implementation, not enabled by default as it is highly
experimental, is ext3 defragmenter which puts all files for prefetch
in one place on disk, so the requests to
2008/9/12 Chris Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm not quite sure what all the ranting is all about regarding Ubuntu
boot times. I never really even thought of it until it was mentioned on
the mailing list here. So, as a test, I timed my own system how long it
takes to boot. From GRUB boot to login
2008/9/12 Chris Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
the mailing list here. So, as a test, I timed my own system how long it
takes to boot. From GRUB boot to login screen, it was 36.72 secs. And
that is on a Celeron D with 512MB DDR RAM and booting from an old IDE
hard drive. I'd imagine that a more
2008/9/12 Timo Jyrinki [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/9/11 Krzysztof Lichota [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As an author of Prefetch, I cannot agree that it would not fix seeks ;)
Part of my implementation, not enabled by default as it is highly
experimental, is ext3 defragmenter which puts all files for
2008/9/12 Oliver Grawert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
You have 25-35 seconds from GRUB till desktop appearing (using autologin)?
i have managed 22 already with a not to drastic set of modifications (19
after grub [1] plus the three second grub timeout) with the ten seconds
my BIOS takes that even stays
hi,
On Do, 2008-09-11 at 22:44 +0300, Marius Gedminas wrote:
Here's my 1:28 bootchart: http://mg.pov.lt/hardy-20080822-1.png
There are at most 4 seconds of idle waiting.
Hey, I see zope2.9 taking quite a bit of the time (20 seconds). I no
longer need that. sudo apt-get remove to the
hi,
On Fr, 2008-09-12 at 09:23 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
You have 25-35 seconds from GRUB till desktop appearing (using autologin)?
i have managed 22 already with a not to drastic set of modifications (19
after grub [1] plus the three second grub timeout) with the ten seconds
my BIOS takes
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 09:23 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
2008/9/11 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
And 30s is considered bringing it down? Wow, how long was it before?
Is there a goal we have for boot time? 30s seems about average for boot
time right now. At least, all of my
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 11:47 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
hi,
On Do, 2008-09-11 at 22:44 +0300, Marius Gedminas wrote:
Here's my 1:28 bootchart: http://mg.pov.lt/hardy-20080822-1.png
There are at most 4 seconds of idle waiting.
Hey, I see zope2.9 taking quite a bit of the time (20
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 09:35 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
Thanks. There are some rough edges in patches themselves which should
be straightened out. And the feedback on using prefetch was pretty
much non-existing.
What is the recommended way of enabling prefetch to test? And can it be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Jones wrote on 11/09/08 23:05:
I'm not quite sure what all the ranting is all about regarding Ubuntu
boot times. I never really even thought of it until it was mentioned on
the mailing list here. So, as a test, I timed my own system how
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 08:05 +1000, Chris Jones wrote:
takes to boot. From GRUB boot to login screen, it was 36.72 secs. And
that is on a Celeron D with 512MB DDR RAM and booting from an old IDE
hard drive. I'd imagine that a more recent dual core setup with more ram
and a more recent sata hard
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 03:09:15PM +0100, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
That's the power of low expectations. Before the 1970s, people were used
to radios taking half a minute to start up. Before the 1990s, people
were used to televisions taking half a minute to start up.
As long as computers
2008/9/10 Przemysław Kulczycki [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Maybe we could achieve it using Prefetch?
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Specs/Prefetch
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AutomaticBootAndApplicationPrefetchingSpec
Prefetch would be nice, and definitely would improve the user
experience. In the
Olá Morten e a todos.
On Thursday 11 September 2008 00:19:34 Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
Is booting really relevant these days? Not for me. At work, the
servers and desktops run weeks and months without a reboot. My
personal laptop, an old Apple Powerbook, boots perhaps once a month.
It
Olá Thomas e a todos.
On Thursday 11 September 2008 09:19:56 Thomas Novin wrote:
Resuming from suspend is also very slow in Ubuntu.
My system used to take 2-3 sec to resume from suspend.
Resume from Hibernation takes quite a bit more (something like 50 secs).
--
BUGabundo :o)
(``-_-´´)
2008/9/11 Timo Jyrinki [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/9/10 Przemysław Kulczycki [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Maybe we could achieve it using Prefetch?
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Specs/Prefetch
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AutomaticBootAndApplicationPrefetchingSpec
Prefetch would be nice, and definitely
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 10:04 +0200, Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
On 11/09/2008, at 03.24, Milos Mandaric wrote:
Is booting really relevant these days? Not for me. At work, the
servers and desktops run weeks and months without a reboot. My
personal laptop, an old Apple Powerbook, boots perhaps
Mackenzie Morgan pisze:
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 13:40 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
it would be cool to see some community activity here (i.e. a team
forming around redoing the scripts in upstart events, doing tests and
measurements and publishing bootcharts ...) if the distro team alone
does it
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 12:57 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
That's what have been done by Microsoft for XP - they had the goal to
bring boot time to 30s and managed to do it. Apparently they forgot to
do the same for Vista ;)
But as mentioned before, they did it by shoving off a bunch of the
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 10:25 +0100, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?
(``-=5F-=B4=B4)_--_Fernando _ wrote:
Olá Thomas e a todos.
On Thursday 11 September 2008 09:19:56 Thomas Novin wrote:
Resuming from suspend is also very slow in Ubuntu.
My system used to take 2-3 sec to resume from suspend.
Resume from
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 02:43:42PM -0400, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 12:57 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
That's what have been done by Microsoft for XP - they had the goal to
bring boot time to 30s and managed to do it. Apparently they forgot to
do the same for Vista ;)
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 22:16 +0300, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 02:43:42PM -0400, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 12:57 +0200, Krzysztof Lichota wrote:
That's what have been done by Microsoft for XP - they had the goal to
bring boot time to 30s and managed
Hrm, my 2-year old laptop takes bout 45 seconds to boot if I have MySQL,
Apache2, and MythTV's server set to start at boot. Actually, the 4-year
old laptop might take about that long regularly...haven't booted that in
a while. I wonder what causes such variation? Certainly the processes
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 03:32:00PM -0400, Martin Owens wrote:
Hrm, my 2-year old laptop takes bout 45 seconds to boot if I have MySQL,
Apache2, and MythTV's server set to start at boot. Actually, the 4-year
old laptop might take about that long regularly...haven't booted that in
a while.
I'm not quite sure what all the ranting is all about regarding Ubuntu
boot times. I never really even thought of it until it was mentioned on
the mailing list here. So, as a test, I timed my own system how long it
takes to boot. From GRUB boot to login screen, it was 36.72 secs. And
that is on a
Am 09.09.2008 um 20:31 schrieb Jonathan Carter (highvoltage):
Perhaps making the boot-process longer, by loading any non-essential
software as late as possible (even long after the user has logged on),
but getting the user interface ready as early as possible, should
be the
target,
ke, 2008-09-10 kello 09:22 +0200, Markus Hitter kirjoitti:
This is what Windows XP does already, isn't it? You boot, get
automatic login, see the desktop, but essentially have to wait longer
to do something useful.
Or, indeed, to do anything. I've experienced this with my girlfriend's
2008/9/9 Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2. Remove the flashes and brown screens when starting Gnome
Personally, my biggest annoyance as a user is the brown screen that
flashes between GDM and when Gnome starts. It would be much nicer if gdm
displayed the greeter for half a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote on 09/09/08 19:31:
...
1. Attempt to get an X server up much sooner
...
See also http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OneSecondX.
Cheers
- --
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Olá Jonathan e a todos.
On Tuesday 09 September 2008 19:31:33 Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
It seems that with the current process, it's close to as fast as it can
be at the moment. Readahead avoids unnecessary disk seeks. Upstart gets
the services started in an optimal (well, let's
hi,
On Di, 2008-09-09 at 20:31 +0200, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
Hi
Some systems have been really successful at making it *appear* as if the
system starts up faster. In my opinion, where the system can't be made
to boot faster, it should be made to appear so.
there are a lot of
Timo Jyrinki pisze:
No, really, I think there is room for at least 5x improvement in disk
seeks. The disk usage is currently terrible, and it is what is is
because of the wish not to do too much optimization work so that
there is no risk of breaking any complex setup of programs. The
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:01:49AM +0100, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote on 09/09/08 19:31:
...
1. Attempt to get an X server up much sooner
...
See also http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OneSecondX.
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 13:40 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
it would be cool to see some community activity here (i.e. a team
forming around redoing the scripts in upstart events, doing tests and
measurements and publishing bootcharts ...) if the distro team alone
does it it will take a lot
On 09/09/2008, at 20.31, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
Some systems have been really successful at making it *appear* as if
the
system starts up faster. In my opinion, where the system can't be made
to boot faster, it should be made to appear so.
Is booting really relevant these
On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 01:19 +0200, Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
On 09/09/2008, at 20.31, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
Some systems have been really successful at making it *appear* as if
the
system starts up faster. In my opinion, where the system can't be made
to boot faster, it
Hi
Some systems have been really successful at making it *appear* as if the
system starts up faster. In my opinion, where the system can't be made
to boot faster, it should be made to appear so.
Here are some ideas around improving boot speed and making it appear faster:
1. Have as few
Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) pisze:
Hi
Some systems have been really successful at making it *appear* as if the
system starts up faster. In my opinion, where the system can't be made
to boot faster, it should be made to appear so.
Here are some ideas around improving boot speed and
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 08:31:33PM +0200, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
Hi
Some systems have been really successful at making it *appear* as if the
system starts up faster. In my opinion, where the system can't be made
to boot faster, it should be made to appear so.
We're right on
47 matches
Mail list logo
