Re: Think twice before moving to systemd

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:31 AM, Anthony ''Ishpeck'' Tedjamulia
<archlinux@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 09:23:33PM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> > So it's only needs twice the time with only on third of the ticks? Well
>> > that is awesome... Yeah to systemd!
>>
>> systemd is much more complicated, and requires many more tricks.
>>
>
> Please remember: I hate systemd.
>
> I have seen systemd boot faster than rough equivalents.
>
> Yes, the software is a huge, bloated piece of crap.  But it
> is also unmistakably capable of faster boot times when
> services are started properly in parallel.
>
> That's assuming a few things (like that your services are
> not hugely inter-dependent or that a couple [like, maybe
> DHCP, depending on your server] just take stupidly long
> to start up).
>
> For all its faults, being incapabel of giving you a boot
> time advantage is _not_ one of them.

Yes, that's *in theory*, but in practice that's not what I see, and I
already investigated the culprit:

http://people.freedesktop.org/~felipec/systemd/bootchart_sysd.png
http://people.freedesktop.org/~felipec/systemd/bootchart_sysv.png

Software shouldn't rely on CONFIG_HZ, but apparently systemd is doing
something that does.

I don't find this surprising at all; systemd is a relatively new piece
of software, and a very complex one, it's bound to have tricky issues
like this one.

-- 
Felipe Contreras


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux