FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-04-2011, 08:56 PM
JB
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

Hi,

I performed a simple home test, a comparison of startup and shutdown times of:
- Live-CD Fedora 16 beta - systemd parallel boot, GNOME 3
- Live-CD Knoppix 6.7.1 - microknoppix-fast-parallel-boot (based on SysV/LSB
scripts), LXDE;
note that Knoppix does decompression while executing

The times measured were:
t1 - time between machine turned ON and showing of live system DE menu
t2 - time between machine "Shutdown" from DE menu and actual machine shutdown

Note: no custom configuration or other user activities were performed.

Notebook 1:
-----------
Lenovo TP R61i, Intel Pentium Core 2 Duo 1.86 GHZ, Intel Mobile 965GM,
2 GB RAM, HD, CD-RW, sound, internal ethernet and wireless.

F16 beta
average t1=3m8s
average t2=10s

Knoppix
average t1=1m37s
average t2=20s

Notebook 2:
-----------
HP Nx6110, Intel Celeron M 1.3 GHZ, Intel Mobile 915GM, 768 MB RAM, HD, CD-RW,
sound, internal ethernet.

F16 beta
average t1=3m42s
average t2=26s

Knoppix
average t1=2m38s
average t2=20s

Results interpretation.
-----------------------
Knoppix won by a wide margin, while:
- Knoppix having microknoppix fast-parallel boot (based on SysV/LSB scripts)
and DE with low resources usage and tailored for desktops
- Fedora having systemd parallel boot and DE tailored for small and simple
devices

JB


--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-04-2011, 09:01 PM
JB
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

Hi,

I performed a simple home test, a comparison of startup and shutdown times of:
- Live-CD Fedora 16 beta - systemd parallel boot, GNOME 3
- Live-CD Knoppix 6.7.1 - microknoppix-fast-parallel-boot (based on SysV/LSB
scripts), LXDE;
note that Knoppix does decompression while executing

The times measured were:
t1 - time between machine turned ON and showing of live system DE menu
t2 - time between machine "Shutdown" from DE menu and actual machine shutdown

Note: no custom configuration or other user activities were performed.

Notebook 1:
-----------
Lenovo TP R61i, Intel Pentium Core 2 Duo 1.86 GHZ, Intel Mobile 965GM,
2 GB RAM, HD, CD-RW, sound, internal ethernet and wireless.

F16 beta
average t1=3m8s
average t2=10s

Knoppix
average t1=1m37s
average t2=20s

Notebook 2:
-----------
HP Nx6110, Intel Celeron M 1.3 GHZ, Intel Mobile 915GM, 768 MB RAM, HD, CD-RW,
sound, internal ethernet.

F16 beta
average t1=3m42s
average t2=26s

Knoppix
average t1=2m38s
average t2=20s

Results interpretation.
-----------------------
Knoppix won by a wide margin, while:
- Knoppix having microknoppix fast-parallel boot (based on SysV/LSB scripts)
and DE with low resources usage and tailored for desktops
- Fedora having systemd parallel boot and DE tailored for small and simple
devices

JB


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 09:45 PM
Lennart Poettering
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On Tue, 04.10.11 21:01, JB (jb.1234abcd@gmail.com) wrote:

> Results interpretation.
> -----------------------
> Knoppix won by a wide margin, while:
> - Knoppix having microknoppix fast-parallel boot (based on SysV/LSB scripts)
> and DE with low resources usage and tailored for desktops

> - Fedora having systemd parallel boot and DE tailored for small and simple
> devices

^^^^^ huh? Fedora is not tailored for that. Would be great of it it
was, but that's simply not the case.

We install LVM and iSCSI and all kinds of other enterprisey stuff
on even the smallest netbook. And LVM is a major source of slowness,
since it requires all devices to be synchronously settled, before
"vgscan" can be called.

Also, we use SELinux and stuff which doesn't speed things up
either. SELinux has become a lot faster at boot in F16, so that's good,
but there's still a price to pay for it, which is more noticable the
weaker your machine is. That said, I do believe that SELinux is a good
thing and should definitely be part of the default install.

Another bigger source of slowness at boot is currently Plymouth which
also requires synchronous settling of devices (tough it's not as bad as
LVM in that regard though, but costs too since EDID probing is
apparently quite slow, and has every right to, but right now we delay
the boot processes for that but we shoudl really do that in the
background).

I have been asking for the removal of LVM from the default install since
a long time, and I am still firmly of the opinion that LVM needs to be
something that folks who want it enable but not something that slows
down everybody else's boot.

If you want a quick boot on a netbook, then remove LVM, iscsi and the
other enterprisey storage stuff. Then run "systemctl mask
fedora-wait-storage.service fedora-storage-init-late.service
fedora-readonly.service fedora-storage-init.service
fedora-loadmodules.service fedora-autoswap.service
fedora-configure.service rc-local.service" to mask a couple of always-on
services, that are needed for enterprisey and legacy stuff. Also
consider disabling stuff like abrtd, or even rsyslog (if you do all log
output goes to kmsg, which reduces disk acesses and is often good
enough), and audit, cpupower, iptables, lldapd, mcelog, multipathd,
lvm2-monitor, mdmonitor, fcoe, dm-event. Check with "systemctl
list-unit-files" what's still left. Then shortcut the initrd by adding
"rootfstype=ext4" to your kernel cmdline amd replacing
"root=UUID=XXXXXXXXX" by "root=/dev/sda6" (or whatever your harddisk is
named in the kernel; what's important here is that the kernel can't look
for harddisks by uuid on its own, that's only done by the
initrd). Bypassing the initrd is well supported on F16 again, with one
exception: plymouth breaks, so disable that: "plymouth.disable=0" on the
kernel cmdline. On my netbook this gives me a bios-to-gdm bootup time of
around 10s, on my laptop of 5s, and Kay's newer laptop of < 3s. And it's
still an awesomely complete system, including SELinux and everything.

And if you compare that with Knoppix then you will still be comparing
apples and oranges, but we should be much more in the area of what
Knoppix provides as boot times.

I'd really like to see Fedora default to some more light-weight
choices. Not only for netbooks and suchlike having LVM and all the
enterprise stuff in the default is a bad choice, but for server VMs
which tend to more lightweight that's the case too. The goals of what is
needed to cope with netbooks and what is needed to cope with
lightweighter VMs are actually much closer then people might think, and
I'd love to see Fedora focus more on both.

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 09:54 PM
Adam Jackson
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 23:45 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:

> Another bigger source of slowness at boot is currently Plymouth which
> also requires synchronous settling of devices (tough it's not as bad as
> LVM in that regard though, but costs too since EDID probing is
> apparently quite slow, and has every right to, but right now we delay
> the boot processes for that but we shoudl really do that in the
> background).

It's much slower than it needs to be. As of last time I looked there's
still cases where a) we're using full EDID fetch as a proxy for
connected-or-not, instead of just a zero-length I2C read, and b) we're
not prefetching and caching EDID on hotplug interrupts, instead fetching
it every time it's asked for.

Even given all that, we should try the faster I2C speeds first and fall
back to slower. And we're not.

Might or might not be able to fix all that up for F16 gold, but it's on
the todo list somewhere.

- ajax
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 09:59 PM
drago01
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:45 PM, Lennart Poettering
<mzerqung@0pointer.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 04.10.11 21:01, JB (jb.1234abcd@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> Results interpretation.
>> -----------------------
>> Knoppix won by a wide margin, while:
>> - Knoppix having microknoppix fast-parallel boot (based on SysV/LSB scripts)
>> * and DE with low resources usage and tailored for desktops
>
>> - Fedora having systemd parallel boot and DE tailored for small and simple
>> * devices
>
> * ^^^^^ huh? Fedora is not tailored for that. Would be great of it it
> * was, but that's simply not the case.
>
> We install LVM and iSCSI and all kinds of other enterprisey stuff
> on even the smallest netbook. And LVM is a major source of slowness,
> since it requires all devices to be synchronously settled, before
> "vgscan" can be called.
>
> Also, we use SELinux and stuff which doesn't speed things up
> either. SELinux has become a lot faster at boot in F16, so that's good,
> but there's still a price to pay for it, which is more noticable the
> weaker your machine is. That said, I do believe that SELinux is a good
> thing and should definitely be part of the default install.
>
> Another bigger source of slowness at boot is currently Plymouth which
> also requires synchronous settling of devices (tough it's not as bad as
> LVM in that regard though, but costs too since EDID probing is
> apparently quite slow, and has every right to, but right now we delay
> the boot processes for that but we shoudl really do that in the
> background).
>
> I have been asking for the removal of LVM from the default install since
> a long time, and I am still firmly of the opinion that LVM needs to be
> something that folks who want it enable but not something that slows
> down everybody else's boot.
>
> If you want a quick boot on a netbook, then remove LVM, iscsi and the
> other enterprisey storage stuff. Then run "systemctl mask
> fedora-wait-storage.service fedora-storage-init-late.service
> fedora-readonly.service fedora-storage-init.service
> fedora-loadmodules.service fedora-autoswap.service
> fedora-configure.service rc-local.service" to mask a couple of always-on
> services, that are needed for enterprisey and legacy stuff. Also
> consider disabling stuff like abrtd, or even rsyslog (if you do all log
> output goes to kmsg, which reduces disk acesses and is often good
> enough), and audit, cpupower, iptables, lldapd, mcelog, multipathd,
> lvm2-monitor, mdmonitor, fcoe, dm-event.

And *sendmail* (in my vms it takes up to 60s to start even though I
never use it; and I it does not really make much sense on desktops).
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 10:03 PM
Adam Miller
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 11:59:09PM +0200, drago01 wrote:
> And *sendmail* (in my vms it takes up to 60s to start even though I
> never use it; and I it does not really make much sense on desktops).

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NoMTA

Yeah ... I was technically the owner on that one, suppose I did a
massive fail there. I suppose we could try and bring this back for F17?

(I would like to note that I did zero of the heavy lifting on the feature
and would like to thank Will Woods for his awesome patches that went
into the NoMTA bits)

-AdamM
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 10:05 PM
Tom Callaway
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On 10/04/2011 11:01 PM, JB wrote:
> I performed a simple home test, a comparison of startup and shutdown times of:
> - Live-CD Fedora 16 beta - systemd parallel boot, GNOME 3
> - Live-CD Knoppix 6.7.1 - microknoppix-fast-parallel-boot (based on SysV/LSB
> scripts), LXDE;

This is roughly analogous to:

"I performed a simple track test, a comparison of lap times of:
- A family station wagon, tuned and optimized for everyday driving
- A Formula 1 race car, tuned and optimized for track racing"

Ignoring the general irrelevancy of such an apples to oranges comparison
for a moment, the conclusion that I draw is this:

For a family station wagon, it isn't that slow.

****

That's not to say that there are no places that we can optimize Fedora
livecd performance, or that we should just be happy with how things are,
but if you want to be taken seriously, you cannot compare it to Knoppix,
whose entire focus and efforts are focused around generating an
extremely minimal and fast Live Linux experience, and you cannot choose
to compare different DEs.

I know I shouldn't feed the anonymous trolls. I guess the jetlag is
making me punchy, and I'm avoiding Chromium NativeClient.

~tom

==
Fedora Project
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 10:11 PM
Lennart Poettering
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On Tue, 04.10.11 17:54, Adam Jackson (ajax@redhat.com) wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 23:45 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> > Another bigger source of slowness at boot is currently Plymouth which
> > also requires synchronous settling of devices (tough it's not as bad as
> > LVM in that regard though, but costs too since EDID probing is
> > apparently quite slow, and has every right to, but right now we delay
> > the boot processes for that but we shoudl really do that in the
> > background).
>
> It's much slower than it needs to be. As of last time I looked there's
> still cases where a) we're using full EDID fetch as a proxy for
> connected-or-not, instead of just a zero-length I2C read, and b) we're
> not prefetching and caching EDID on hotplug interrupts, instead fetching
> it every time it's asked for.
>
> Even given all that, we should try the faster I2C speeds first and fall
> back to slower. And we're not.
>
> Might or might not be able to fix all that up for F16 gold, but it's on
> the todo list somewhere.

Well, tbh I am not too concerned about the initialization speed of
specific drivers like the DRI stuff. What matters more is that we can
initialize them in parallel with other stuff, and don't have to
synchronously stall the entire boot for it, which Plymouth currently
makes us to for the DRI drivers.

Or in other words: I believe the priority should be to fix Plymouth.
Fixing the EDID stuff matters only if we manage to pull gdm so early
into the boot that EDID would become a stumbling block since gdm/X11
actually really needs the EDID stuff to be fully probed.

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 11:32 PM
JB
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

JB <jb.1234abcd <at> gmail.com> writes:

> ...
> Notebook 1:
> -----------
> Lenovo TP R61i, Intel Pentium Core 2 Duo 1.86 GHZ, Intel Mobile 965GM,
> 2 GB RAM, HD, CD-RW, sound, internal ethernet and wireless.
>
> F16 beta
> average t1=3m8s
> average t2=10s
> ...

Let me append "The Blame Game".

# less -i /var/log/messages
...
Oct 4 20:40:40 localhost systemd[1]: Startup finished in 1s 438ms
413us (kernel) + 12s 445ms 772us (initrd) + 3min 58s 333ms 952us
(userspace) = 4min 12s 218ms 137us.
...

# systemd-analyze blame
32983ms livesys.service
22828ms NetworkManager.service
19438ms bluetooth.service
19247ms iptables.service
19245ms ip6tables.service
18837ms abrtd.service
18672ms mcelog.service
18657ms auditd.service
18035ms irqbalance.service
16885ms rsyslog.service
16814ms systemd-logind.service
16766ms avahi-daemon.service
16696ms abrt-ccpp.service
16659ms mdmonitor-takeover.service
13837ms udev-settle.service
11392ms plymouth-start.service
6264ms fedora-loadmodules.service
4306ms systemd-vconsole-setup.service
4258ms multipathd.service
3850ms fedora-storage-init.service
3744ms fcoe.service
3453ms fedora-readonly.service
3270ms media.mount
3121ms udev-trigger.service
2728ms console-kit-log-system-start.service
2483ms systemd-remount-api-vfs.service
2283ms udev.service
2189ms dbus.service
1994ms systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service
1332ms fedora-storage-init-late.service
1061ms systemd-sysctl.service
790ms remount-rootfs.service
456ms sm-client.service
404ms netfs.service
385ms fedora-wait-storage.service
341ms lvm2-monitor.service
279ms systemd-readahead-collect.service
253ms rtkit-daemon.service
77ms sendmail.service
57ms console-kit-daemon.service
45ms livesys-late.service
44ms iscsi.service
31ms sandbox.service
15ms accounts-daemon.service
12ms systemd-user-sessions.service

JB


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 10-04-2011, 11:53 PM
Jef Spaleta
 
Default Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:32 PM, JB <jb.1234abcd@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me append "The Blame Game".
> # systemd-analyze blame
> *32983ms livesys.service
> *22828ms NetworkManager.service

That timing for NM is so vastly different than what I'm seeing on my
installed F15 system. I am intrigued.

-jef
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:28 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org