On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:57:09 -0600 TriKster Abacus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Collins Richey wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:34:34 -0600 > > TriKster Abacus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > ... the changes in kernel 2.6 are not > > designed to improve the operation of single activities, but rather > > to improve the aggregate thruput of the system for l-o-t-s of > > activities, i.e. > > > > 1) more robust scalibility for >4 processors > > 2) better response for interactive jobs (i.e. no job should starve > > for service while a cpu hog is getting its cut off the top). > > > > Dude! OMG! are you not reading what the developers are saying about > 2.6? They are saying that it has extreme performance gains for the > "desktop" user. > You might want to check this out: > > http://www.tinyminds.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=845 > > I mean.. that is directly from Mr. RML (love-sources) himself! > > .. And he has quite a large paragraph speaking of the "desktop" > qualities! > <start of excerpt> Unfortunately, the interview confirms what I was saying. Here are relevant excerpts: TM: On to the actual questions, as Tinyminds.org is primarily a desktop user Linux site we were wondering if you would tell us a bit about the changes the desktop user can expect in the upcoming kernel 2.6? RML: Desktop users can expect a bit in 2.6, which is somewhat surprising as the goals of 2.5 were primarily to improve scalability and reduce bottlenecks in large machines. [ please read that again carefully and compare with my version! ] ... In short, 2.6 should be "nicer" on the desktop but for normal machines with normal workloads the improvement will not be huge since 2.4 was not that bad to begin with. But 2.6 will certainly be excellent. </end of excerpt Which part of this do you interpret as meaning that desktop users can expect fantastic gains in performance??? We're talking about modest improvements for n-o-r-m-a-l desktop users, not b***s to the wall gamesters or DVD ripping stations. I stick by my claims. 2.6 is better but the performance gains are subtle and most in evidence for interactive desktop users when there is a heavy load on the system. My kudos to the 2.6 developers. The system has been rock-solid stable on my system since late in 2.5.x days, and I could care less what is currently happening with 2.4 and its older (but still good) design. I'm a died-in-the-wool ext3 user. By the time a few more .releases have gone by, 2.6 should be rock solid for XFS and other fs as well. -- Collins - Denver Area - Gentoo stable kernel 2.6.2-rc1 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
