On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 05:18:07PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2008-Jul-18 08:37:25 +0200, Alexander Leidinger <Alexander_at_Leidinger.net> wrote: > >Are you aware that the parallel starting in Solaris 10 reduced the > >booting time by a nice percentage? > > Given that Solaris boots in geologic time, this probably wouldn't > be difficult. > > > If yes, do you expect that FreeBSD > >behaves significantly different or do you "just" want to see numbers? > > Parallel starting is not guaranteed to be an improvement. Starting a > whole pile of processes that are I/O bound during initialisation > (think squid or some databases) may be worse than starting them one > at a time. Likewise, a whole pile of processes that are CPU bound > will just thrash the scheduler. (Though parallel starting of I/O and > CPU bound processes should be a win). Speaking about small systems, where startup time is more a problem than on 08/15 desktop and server systems. What I would love to see is that scripts like moused, ypserv, lpt, etc are not started if the services are disabled. So far each script is started, sucks in routines plus rc.conf then possibly does nothing reasonable after wasting some seconds boottime. Of course I can remove the scripts, but you'll never know if you need one of them at a later time and having the right set of scripts can become tricky. Parallel however doesn't sound interesting for me, since those systems are CPU and memory bound, so I don't see a possible win, maybe even a degration if memory restricts. > >Sidenote: Even if there's no significant speedup, the possibility to > >start things in parallel should be provided, this would allow more > >experimentation (at all respectively later). > > Agreed. -- B.Walter <bernd_at_bwct.de> http://www.bwct.de Modbus/TCP Ethernet I/O Baugruppen, ARM basierte FreeBSD Rechner uvm.Received on Fri Jul 18 2008 - 10:29:37 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:33 UTC