Sorry Simeon, That is all miss informed bull sh*t ! * Ubuntu has *not* complied its kernel in real time mode as default. * The RAM is not 'wasted' if it is helping your IO responsiveness issues and as Desktops see very heavy IO usage these days then its clearly a very good use of RAM. * A real time kernel does *not* help in responsiveness issues but is used for time critical situations such as embedded type systems and will almost always preform extremely badly in a desktop situation except maybe audio editing. In answer to your question, yes you can put Solaris into real time mode using: dispadmin -d RT which would be a bad idea. * ZFS does not eat up all your RAM and you can limit it if you really must.. * IO bandwidth is the number one bottle neck on any x86/x64 system, end of story.
Good luke writing a modern OS and software stack in ASM that is non-portable highly architecture dependent and _then_ trying to debug that. Oh and you didn't even email the list, you sent it to me. Please have a *clue* instead of misinforming people. You may now thank me for forwarding your email :p Thanks, Edward. 2008/9/26 Simeon Nifos <archwndas at googlemail.com>: >> Hi, >> >> Welcome to OpenSolaris. >> >> Tip: Some times x86 IO controller problems can come from a BIOS bug >> making a SATA controller run in PATA (legacy mode). I seen this >> before. Make sure you have a up to date BIOS. >> >> In regards to responsiveness. Pick a WM such a Fluxbox instead of >> Gnome. You may just find that it frees up heaps of system time to do >> more useful things. >> >> ZFS root will really help you as long as you have plenty of RAM. Make >> sure to kit your system out with as much RAM as you can stick in it as >> its so cheap today. I would say 2GB minimum, 4GB+ preferred. You _may_ >> think this is a lot but modern software has modern requirements, your >> really see the difference in regards to IO as ZFS will 'read ahead' >> and cache into RAM, trust me ! > > And what happens Edward when you need the RAM for other things? I would > definitely did not like to see my RAM wasted for making my filesystem faster > unless I have to build up a server dealing with heave disk IO 25hours per day. > Don't you think that having a file system which eats up all your RAM > is something > like WINDOW SVISTA is doing? Eat up all your computer resources just to > show off or to push Laptop marketing further? Of course if I had 128GB of RAM > I wouldn't mind unless I would try to run some applicationg needing RAM close > to 120GB which is not that uncommon in the area I am working with. > > If you want responsiveness, consider seriously an operating system with a > real time kernel. Linux Ubuntu derivatives offer a realtime precompiled kernel > with modules as well. I do not know if OpenSolaris is realtime. As for the > filesystem what people say is true. Caching into RAM will definitely increase > responsiveness. I do not know however what will happen if power goes off > suddenly. > > Keep also in mind that KDE and GNOME are crappy. FluxBOX is even more > crappy since it offers nothing with an awful alternative. Consider CTWM if > you want to minimize the WM overhead. It is far more convenient from FluxBox. > A lilghter alternative than KDE/GNOME offering at the same time a lot of > convenience is XFCE. Even lighter is Enlightenment and E17. Both are highly > responsive and give you a completely different look and feel. > > There is more about responsiveness. One of main problems when it comes > to rensponsiveness is the fact that a lot of shared objects have to load > when an application which links to too many of them starts executing > (firefox). > Most Unix applications link to libc which is huge, The same code linked to > a tiny libc library (there are rojects like that, others written in > assembly) may > become 10 to 30 times smaller in size. This means that we could have > potentially > the same functionality fitting in 10-20 times less disk space. Can you > imagine ? > an 10GB operating system recompiled to become 500MB in size? Yeah that's > true. But nobody is deciding to start such a project. No huge DVD isos > to download > no caches filled up with crap, no too many huge shared objects > (libraries) to load > at start time e.t.c. Check the project www.menuetos.net. This is a responsive > operating system you would like to try. Written in assembly enirely. Then > you will understand what we are missing. > > There is something awkward about Solaris. This is JAVA along with really > awful administration making your life hard. Especially if you come from > Windows or Linux. Like any other Unix derivative documentation is awful > as well. Unix guys are not bored writing 100 of pages of properties of their > software but they consider really redundant to give a few examples, because > they think they have explained in the manpage everything very well. This is > not Solaris problem but a problem of UNIX community itself. Like a cancer > that keeps growing. WIKI pages are trying to cure this but it is getting > worse. > > Cheers ... > -- All Documents adhered to the ISO/IEC 26300 standard file format for electronic office documents, such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents from this email address. The author does not take responsibility of the recipients inability to read international standards and who use proprietary products such as MS Office. See: http://www.openoffice.org/ Edward O'Callaghan. -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EdwardOcallaghan http://moonshine.opn4.org/ http://www.pcbsd.org/
