Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
On Apr 13, 2013, at 18:37, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: For seriously lightweight window managers, I've been using vtwm for years, still published by the Penguin Liberation Front and listed at http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/13029794/dir/mandriva_2010/com/vtwm-5.4.7-1plf.i586.rpm.html. Be warned that PLF packages are NOT intended for Fedora. Completely true: they often require some editing of dependency names for Fedora and RHEL. The Penguin Liberation Front has been a very useful resource, for years, of components whose licenses are confusing or problematic: the old xv and twm programs, libdvdcss for ripping DVD's, MPEG libraries, and Pine and daemontools before they had their licensing revised. I understand why those components can't always be included in a completely open distribution with US based resources and primary maintainers like Fedora. But man, they're useful if you can accept the licensing personally or you're in a country with sane laws about DRM. For Fedora, there is RPM Fusion which provides such packages (and a separate repository for libdvdcss at rpm.livna.org). Kevin Kofler Unfortunately, rpm.livna.org spends its whole front page saying it's all at RPMfusion, except one package which they *very, very, carefully* do not name or even list an actual directory URL to review. A bit of digging shows that the correct URL to see the *content* is http://rpm.livna.org/repo/, and you're right, it's libdvdcss. I'm glad it's available. The DRM craziness around that package is insane, and I'm glad when I can do the work in a country that does not have such onerous restrictions. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: For seriously lightweight window managers, I've been using vtwm for years, still published by the Penguin Liberation Front and listed at http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/13029794/dir/mandriva_2010/com/vtwm-5.4.7-1plf.i586.rpm.html. Be warned that PLF packages are NOT intended for Fedora. The Penguin Liberation Front has been a very useful resource, for years, of components whose licenses are confusing or problematic: the old xv and twm programs, libdvdcss for ripping DVD's, MPEG libraries, and Pine and daemontools before they had their licensing revised. I understand why those components can't always be included in a completely open distribution with US based resources and primary maintainers like Fedora. But man, they're useful if you can accept the licensing personally or you're in a country with sane laws about DRM. For Fedora, there is RPM Fusion which provides such packages (and a separate repository for libdvdcss at rpm.livna.org). Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
Nicolas Mailhot wrote: I don't contest this, but it is still less complex than expecting all the unix software that has been written in the last decades to stop using /tmp for big files because it is suddenly limited by memory limits. I don't mind systemd exploring new concepts (and in fact I like it) but it is not reasonable to push those new concepts in a state which is known to break existing software. The tmpfs change has only been implemented halfway. +1, /tmp on tmpfs is a totally broken feature and should never have been approved. It needs to be reverted ASAP (IMHO, even in an F18 update). Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
Le Mer 10 avril 2013 22:52, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit : On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 06:55:59PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Disable /tmp on tmpfs? I have suggested this should be done automatically in RAM-limited situations (primarily for VMs): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858265 Well, ideally it would never have been done in the first place, but we are where we are. Ideally it should never have been done without some automated way to grow swap via files in /var/tmp when the tmpfs gets saturated (and possibly shrink it back when the pressure ceases). That's the only way to get the benefits of a ramdisk without hitting mem limits at unexpected moments. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 01:51:16PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Mer 10 avril 2013 22:52, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit : On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 06:55:59PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Disable /tmp on tmpfs? I have suggested this should be done automatically in RAM-limited situations (primarily for VMs): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858265 Well, ideally it would never have been done in the first place, but we are where we are. Ideally it should never have been done without some automated way to grow swap via files in /var/tmp when the tmpfs gets saturated (and possibly shrink it back when the pressure ceases). That's the only way to get the benefits of a ramdisk without hitting mem limits at unexpected moments. This would be quite complex. /tmp on disk already has the property that it uses memory (ie. the buffer cache) when available and transparently spills to disk when it is not. tmpfs gets away with ignoring fsync, so in some synthentic benchmarks it appears faster. You could imagine an ext4 attribute that could be added to /tmp to make it too ignore sync/fsync/journal. In fact ext4 already has the *opposite* attribute -- to force updates to a particular file or directory to be synchronous. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
I run it virtualized right now with 1 Gig of RAM and default configurations, which is not roomy with all the new eye candy and Gnome 3 environment but it's workable. Ripping out NetworkManager kicking and screaming, and all the different PackageKit toolkits is helpful to reducing the bloat down to a lean environment that can do actual software building and testing. Running a lighter window manager is a *huge* performance win: the excessive eye candy for the new Gnome is very resource expensive. Of course, I tend to prefer running Emacs in individual terminals without X, to reduce screen clutter and separate my multiple tasks. So your tastes may vary. For seriously lightweight window managers, I've been using vtwm for years, still published by the Penguin Liberation Front and listed at http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/13029794/dir/mandriva_2010/com/vtwm-5.4.7-1plf.i586.rpm.html. The Penguin Liberation Front has been a very useful resource, for years, of components whose licenses are confusing or problematic: the old xv and twm programs, libdvdcss for ripping DVD's, MPEG libraries, and Pine and daemontools before they had their licensing revised. I understand why those components can't always be included in a completely open distribution with US based resources and primary maintainers like Fedora. But man, they're useful if you can accept the licensing personally or you're in a country with sane laws about DRM. On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de wrote: Dear developers, I was running F18 on an old notebook with 512 MB memory (not extendable). Now, I upgraded this box to F19 with yum. The upgrade was done, but now, the box is no more operable because it is continuously swapping. Question: which minimal memory size is recommended for F19? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 18 (Spherical Cow): Kernel-3.8.6-203.fc18.x86_64 Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
Le Jeu 11 avril 2013 14:07, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit : On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 01:51:16PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Mer 10 avril 2013 22:52, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit : On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 06:55:59PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Disable /tmp on tmpfs? I have suggested this should be done automatically in RAM-limited situations (primarily for VMs): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858265 Well, ideally it would never have been done in the first place, but we are where we are. Ideally it should never have been done without some automated way to grow swap via files in /var/tmp when the tmpfs gets saturated (and possibly shrink it back when the pressure ceases). That's the only way to get the benefits of a ramdisk without hitting mem limits at unexpected moments. This would be quite complex. I don't contest this, but it is still less complex than expecting all the unix software that has been written in the last decades to stop using /tmp for big files because it is suddenly limited by memory limits. I don't mind systemd exploring new concepts (and in fact I like it) but it is not reasonable to push those new concepts in a state which is known to break existing software. The tmpfs change has only been implemented halfway. -- Nicolas Mailhot -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:26:48 +0200 Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de wrote: Dear developers, I was running F18 on an old notebook with 512 MB memory (not extendable). Now, I upgraded this box to F19 with yum. The upgrade was done, but now, the box is no more operable because it is continuously swapping. Question: which minimal memory size is recommended for F19? We don't know yet, as f19 hasn't been released. ;) There's still debugging options enabled on the kernel, but I wouldn't think that would cause 'continuously swapping'. Can you use top/ps/etc to identify which thing is using up memory? You could also try booting with 'slub_debug=-' or using a rawhide no debug kernel: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RawhideKernelNodebug kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
I was running F18 on an old notebook ... Question: which minimal memory size is recommended for F19? For graphical desktop, the installer currently warns if less than 768MB. Many users probably will be uncomfortable with less than 1GB. Things you can try: Append cgroup_disable=memory to the kernel boot command line. This saves somewhere around 1% (10MB out of 1GB), but every MB counts. Append selinux=0 to the kernel boot command line. This saved me 140MB (difference in grep MemFree /proc/meminfo after booting to single user), which is gigantic. When I decided to restore SELinux, the next boot took about 4 minutes to relabel all files. Stop and disable unwanted services. For example: systemctl stop sendmail.service systemctl disable sendmail.service -- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
On 04/10/2013 06:23 PM, John Reiser wrote: I was running F18 on an old notebook ... Question: which minimal memory size is recommended for F19? For graphical desktop, the installer currently warns if less than 768MB. Are these the installation memory requirements or the run-time requirements? I am asking because running F18 seems perfectly possible on with 512MB, but running the installer wasn't. Many users probably will be uncomfortable with less than 1GB. Things you can try: Append cgroup_disable=memory to the kernel boot command line. This saves somewhere around 1% (10MB out of 1GB), but every MB counts. Append selinux=0 to the kernel boot command line. This saved me 140MB (difference in grep MemFree /proc/meminfo after booting to single user), which is gigantic. When I decided to restore SELinux, the next boot took about 4 minutes to relabel all files. Stop and disable unwanted services. For example: systemctl stop sendmail.service systemctl disable sendmail.service Disable /tmp on tmpfs? Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
And obviously, you *must* have some swap space if you are trying to run with low RAM. Even as small as 100MB of swap space will help. -- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 06:55:59PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Disable /tmp on tmpfs? I have suggested this should be done automatically in RAM-limited situations (primarily for VMs): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858265 Well, ideally it would never have been done in the first place, but we are where we are. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Recommended memory size for F19?
On 10/04/13 08:53 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:26:48 +0200 Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de wrote: Dear developers, I was running F18 on an old notebook with 512 MB memory (not extendable). Now, I upgraded this box to F19 with yum. The upgrade was done, but now, the box is no more operable because it is continuously swapping. Question: which minimal memory size is recommended for F19? We don't know yet, as f19 hasn't been released. ;) There's still debugging options enabled on the kernel, but I wouldn't think that would cause 'continuously swapping'. I think debug kernels actually do result in substantially increased memory usage, for some reason. Certainly, Alphas always seem to need more RAM for a successful install than Betas and Finals. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
