On Wednesday 17 December 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:16:36 -0500 (EST) > > Seth Vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Or hibernate? > > > > At least on my system hibernate takes as much time as a reboot. > > btw this is a very fundamental property of hibernate. You need to do all > disk IO to get the system state to disk. And then at resume, you need > to do all disk IO to get the state from disk again. That's twice ;) > > This is compounded by the property that a hibernate tends to flush at > least half the disk cache (it has to, to get space to work in), which > you then need to page right back in, so even when you're back, the first > minute or two sucks badly. > > I suspect you will always be able to boot faster than you can > hibernate+resume. I have very different experience. For example comparable (from grub going away to KDE + my bunch of default apps running and usable) numbers just taken from the desktop box in front of which I'm right now (AMD64 3200, 2G RAM, SATA, F-9 x86_64 KDE): - shutdown: 28 sec - fresh boot: 66 sec - suspend to disk: 17 sec - resume from disk: 23 sec Shutdown takes a ~5 second penalty compared to suspend to disk due to the shutdown sound during which everything else appears to be idling, and fresh boot takes a bit of a penalty because my most recent readahead-collector run (using the F-10 one) is not very recent, but the numbers speak for themselves anyway. Also, I have a gut feeling that the sluggishness for a while after the desktop is up is clearly worse on a fresh reboot than in resume from disk case. But it's possible that I misremember this one - I haven't really shut down/rebooted except for kernel updates in almost half a year. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
