Re: Fwd: Effect of Processor and Memory on KDE4 execution speed

On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 14:42 -0800, Robison, Dave wrote:
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------  
>                           Subject: 
> Effect of Processor and Memory on
> KDE4 execution speed
>                              Date: 
> Tue, 14 Feb 2012 09:39:36 -0500
>                              From: 
> Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
> <m.e.sanliturk_at_gmail.com>
>                                To: 
> FreeBSD Current
> <current_at_freebsd.org>
> 
> 
> Dear All ,
> 
> Today I have encountered a case which I think informing you about it may be
> useful .
> 
> In my previous messages , I have mentioned very slowness of KDE4 .
> 
> 
> Onto another computer I have installed DruidBSD 9.0 b56 amd64 , and KDE4 .
> In that installation KDE4 worked surprisingly fast .
> 

Great! Glad to hear it's fast!

Though, a couple corrections about the statement above.

First correction:

You meand "FreeBSD Druid", not "DruidBSD".

The "FreeBSD Druid" is a FreeBSD installer.
The "DruidBSD" is a micro distribution that can't/doesn't install
anything.

Second correction:

The "FreeBSD Druid" installs a vanilla, completely unmodified
RELENG_9_0_RELEASE copy of FreeBSD (albeit using sysinstall(8) instead
of bsdinstall(8)).


> To understand whether difference is among FreeBSD or DruidBSD , I have
> installed
> FreeBSD 9.0 Release amd64 and KDE4 on the same computer instead of DruidBSD
> .
> 
> The KDE4 has worked flawlesly i.e. , means very fast .
> 

Cool. Glad to hear it's fast there too (makes sense; see below)

With respect to the binaries that are being laid-down by the FreeBSD
Druid, there is no difference in comparison to the official installer.

However, the FreeBSD Druid does do some post-install configuration of
the system that the official installer does not (though none of these
customizations should have any effect on KDE in any way shape-or-form):

1. It enables sshd root login in /etc/ssh/sshd_config
2. It enables netwait in /etc/rc.conf (by adding netwait_enable="YES")
3. It installs perl-5.14 (as a package so if you don't want it, you can
pkg_delete it to get rid of it)
4. It sets the root password
5. It installs /usr/local/sbin/host-setup
6. It configures root login-shell to be /usr/local/sbin/host-setup for
easy setup on first-login (once exited, must be run manually henceforth)
7. It installs rsync (as a package, so if you don't want it you can
pkg_delete it)
8. It installs bonnie (as a package; don't want -- pkg_delete)
9. Enables SU+J on /tmp /var and /usr

None of these customizations should have any effect on system
performance whatsoever.

So I recommend not treating this as a "FreeBSD Druid" versus "FreeBSD"
problem.

NOTE: and again, "DruidBSD" is not an installable OS, only a micro Live
Distribution used for doing rescues or simply booting into a mfs
environment.



> To make equivalent the installations on both computers , I have installed
> FreeBSD 9.0 Release amd64 and KDE4 on the slow computer exactly as in fast
> computer .
> 

I'm confused.

In the immediately-above paragraph you mention a fast computer and a
slow computer. But in the paragraphs that proceeded it, I only see
mention of fast-running KDE4.

If you read the previous paragraphs carefully, you're stating that both
installers ("FreeBSD Druid" and the official, both) produced fast-
running installations of KDE4.

Which is it?


> 
> Starting times after first boot ( to eliminate initialization effects ) are
> the following
> ( All timings are from "root" ) :
> 

Is this on the box that was installed with FreeBSD Druid or box
installed with official 9.0-RELEASE media?


> >From "startx" ( which contains "exec ... kde4 ..." )
> to   appearance of KDE menu symbol at the bottom left corner :
> 
> 
> Fast computer : 8 GB : 0+ ( < 1 ) minute ( 4 x 2 GB )
> Slow computer : 4 GB : 2+ ( < 3 ) minutes ( 2 x 2 GB ) ( 2 x ! GB chips
> removed ) ,
>                 6 GB : 8+ ( < 9 ) minutes ( 2 x ( 2 , 1 ) GB ) .
>                 ( Memory chip installation conforms to main board manual . )
>                 ( The clock does not have second counter . )
> 
> Fast Computer
>   CPU : Intel Pentium Dual CPU E2220 _at_ 2.40 GHz ( 2397.65-MHz K-8class CPU )
>   ACPI APIC Table : < INTEL DG965WH >
> 
> Slow Computer
>   CPU : Intel Core 2 QUAD CPU Q6600 _at_ 2.40 GHz ( 2397.65-MHz K-8class CPU )
>   ACPI APIC Table : < INTEL DG965WH >
> 
> ( The main boards are the same ) .
> ( All of the memory chips are the same : Kingston HyperX 800 MHz )
> 

In your metrics above, which machine (fast vs slow) was installed with
which installer?



> I could not understand the reason(s) of the differences .
> 

Disk partitions? (I'm guessing).

There's really no difference between what the official 9.0-RELEASE
installer installs and what the FreeBSD Druid installs. They were both
compiled from RELENG_9_0_RELEASE within a day from each other. The
likelihood that the binaries would differ with respect to code they were
compiled from is highly unlikely.

NOTE: The installed kernel should even have the same MD5 (can't say the
same for the rest of the system, because I did have to do a fresh
release(7) process -- though differing MD5s will not matter, the code
was built within 24 hours from the official release build).
-- 
Devin

_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.