Comments on: Comparing Distribution Boot Times http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/ openSUSE and open source related musings Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:22:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Muggy http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-85 Muggy Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:19:00 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-85 Chuck. In the interest of saving electricity, I don't have my PC on 24/7. I primarily use it for playing music or videos. A fast boot time is very useful....if you're wanting to hear a song, it's annoying to have to wait minutes for an OS to boot. Ideally, I'd like an ultra fast booting OS that simply played mp3 and divx files, although this seems to only be offered as a commercial, sealed box product. Chuck. In the interest of saving electricity, I don’t have my PC on 24/7. I primarily use it for playing music or videos. A fast boot time is very useful….if you’re wanting to hear a song, it’s annoying to have to wait minutes for an OS to boot.

Ideally, I’d like an ultra fast booting OS that simply played mp3 and divx files, although this seems to only be offered as a commercial, sealed box product.

]]> By: Top Linux News » Comparing GNU/Linux Distribution Boot Times http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-76 Top Linux News » Comparing GNU/Linux Distribution Boot Times Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:45:57 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-76 [...] read more | digg story [...] [...] read more | digg story [...]

]]> By: Chuck Taylor http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-44 Chuck Taylor Tue, 25 Sep 2007 13:34:14 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-44 I'm curious... Why all the fuss about something that only happens once during your PC operations. The longest boot time is 41 secs which is still shorter than M$ and it gives time to get coffee and then settle down to computing. I have a 3.2ghz HP with an Intel Dual core. Fastest thing I have had. Slowest was an 8080 running DOS... way back. But even then the boot was only once, at the beginning of operations. Then it was forgotten. Perhaps I am missing something. But I just don't see the importance of booting up faster... unless it is life critical. I’m curious… Why all the fuss about something that only happens once during your PC operations. The longest boot time is 41 secs which is still shorter than M$ and it gives time to get coffee and then settle down to computing. I have a 3.2ghz HP with an Intel Dual core. Fastest thing I have had. Slowest was an 8080 running DOS… way back. But even then the boot was only once, at the beginning of operations. Then it was forgotten. Perhaps I am missing something. But I just don’t see the importance of booting up faster… unless it is life critical.

]]> By: Boycott Novell » Do-No-Evil Saturday: OpenSUSE Faster and Better, Novell’s Financial Results Lift Stock http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-30 Boycott Novell » Do-No-Evil Saturday: OpenSUSE Faster and Better, Novell’s Financial Results Lift Stock Sat, 01 Sep 2007 01:51:46 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-30 [...] Giannaros has compared the boot times of various popular GNU/Linux distributions. Here is the run-down with [...] [...] Giannaros has compared the boot times of various popular GNU/Linux distributions. Here is the run-down with [...]

]]> By: renoX http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-27 renoX Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:50:58 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-27 Interesting, note that BeOS on my Celeron333 with 128Mo of RAM took 14s to boot from the bootloader to a fully functional desktop. To do an equivalent comparison, you should have added the time to have KDE or Gnome starting in autologin mode.. So Linux has still quite a few progress to made on this point (and on the interface responsiveness). Interesting, note that BeOS on my Celeron333 with 128Mo of RAM took 14s to boot from the bootloader to a fully functional desktop.

To do an equivalent comparison, you should have added the time to have KDE or Gnome starting in autologin mode..
So Linux has still quite a few progress to made on this point (and on the interface responsiveness).

]]> By: Francis http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-26 Francis Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:06:01 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-26 <p>Matt: no, that'd be pretty useless. If you go down that road you might as well start making sure that each distribution has the same packages compiled in the same way as well, with similar patches etc. </p> <br><br> <p>The whole point of the test was to compare default boot times, since our classic Aunt Tille won't be modifying any boot scripts or necessarily stopping and starting extra services. These tests and comparisons certainly are not immune from the "it runs faster but it doesn't have functionality x, which Distro A has". For example, Ubuntu doesn't start sshd and smptd, which will speed up things a little but is also that little bit questionable.</p> <br><br> <p>That said, the nice thing about bootchart is that it will give you a nice representation of the services run and the disk utilization, which is why you can see where the problems are with delays in boot time.</p> Matt: no, that’d be pretty useless. If you go down that road you might as well start making sure that each distribution has the same packages compiled in the same way as well, with similar patches etc.

The whole point of the test was to compare default boot times, since our classic Aunt Tille won’t be modifying any boot scripts or necessarily stopping and starting extra services. These tests and comparisons certainly are not immune from the “it runs faster but it doesn’t have functionality x, which Distro A has”. For example, Ubuntu doesn’t start sshd and smptd, which will speed up things a little but is also that little bit questionable.

That said, the nice thing about bootchart is that it will give you a nice representation of the services run and the disk utilization, which is why you can see where the problems are with delays in boot time.

]]> By: Matt http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-25 Matt Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:43:28 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-25 You reaaly need to repeat the test, making sure the same services are being called up, or at least list those louded by default for each distro. Thanks for doing the test, it makes for an interesting read. You reaaly need to repeat the test, making sure the same services are being called up, or at least list those louded by default for each distro.

Thanks for doing the test, it makes for an interesting read.

]]> By: Francis http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-24 Francis Sun, 26 Aug 2007 13:17:13 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-24 Serge, absolutely nothing special, like I said. It's a completely default install with only bootchart added. Note that it was Kubuntu [Gutsy] Tribe 4 though, and not Feisty. I'm not sure if they've made any improvements during the releases. One thing that can really increase boot time though is large, filled-up extra partitions, which take time to mount. Though of course if you have more services (i.e. http server, etc) starting it will also take longer. If you're using reiserfs (as SUSE used to) it will also take longer ;) My laptop itself is ok but it's really nothing special: 1.8 Ghz core duo and 1Gig of RAM. Needless to say, openSUSE at least boots a little faster on my desktop, which also isn't _that_ great: 3400+ AMD64, 1Gig of RAM. Serge, absolutely nothing special, like I said. It’s a completely default install with only bootchart added. Note that it was Kubuntu [Gutsy] Tribe 4 though, and not Feisty. I’m not sure if they’ve made any improvements during the releases.

One thing that can really increase boot time though is large, filled-up extra partitions, which take time to mount. Though of course if you have more services (i.e. http server, etc) starting it will also take longer. If you’re using reiserfs (as SUSE used to) it will also take longer ;)

My laptop itself is ok but it’s really nothing special: 1.8 Ghz core duo and 1Gig of RAM. Needless to say, openSUSE at least boots a little faster on my desktop, which also isn’t _that_ great: 3400+ AMD64, 1Gig of RAM.

]]> By: Serge http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-23 Serge Sun, 26 Aug 2007 10:50:58 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-23 I have a pretty freaking powerful PC (it cost me 3400 USD) and last time I tried feisty it took about 40 seconds if not more to get to KDM... If you could share with me how you managed to get 31 I'll be happy. I have a pretty freaking powerful PC (it cost me 3400 USD) and last time I tried feisty it took about 40 seconds if not more to get to KDM… If you could share with me how you managed to get 31 I’ll be happy.

]]> By: Stef http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-22 Stef Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:43:05 +0000 http://francis.giannaros.org/blog/2007/08/23/comparing-distribution-boot-times/#comment-22 Come on arch fans you know as well as I do these aren't fair comments. Arch is bare bones Suse is full blown. Comparing a system thats a rolling release to one thats not, not to mention you maybe running a splitted kdemod which has been compiled against 4.2.1-3 compared to full blown kde. Not to mention the possibilty of bakgrounding boot tasks ;) Come on arch fans you know as well as I do these aren’t fair comments. Arch is bare bones Suse is full blown.

Comparing a system thats a rolling release to one thats not, not to mention you maybe running a splitted kdemod which has been compiled against 4.2.1-3 compared to full blown kde.

Not to mention the possibilty of bakgrounding boot tasks ;)

]]>