Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote: > 2008/1/12, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx <mailto:pertusus@xxxxxxx>>: > > On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 10:34:38PM +0100, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote: > > > > > > > So where Fedora just... sucks? Don't tell me "everything in Fedora is > > perfect". Fedora is slow. It's a fact. > > If you want to know, search. And avoid coming with ideas, but with > facts. > You're funny... No, serious. And I think Patrice is willing to believe you when you say Fedora feels slower than OpenSuSE. But, if it's real, and you're motivated to see it change, stick with it, and *really* find out why it is so. First prove it: find a representative test, measure it objectively, and if Fedora is slower, find out why by further measurement and testing. You can be part of the solution. For example - the Linux Battery Life Toolkit (BLTK) has 6 representative workloads - Idle, Reader, Office, DVD Player, SW Developer, and 3D-Gamer. Maybe that could be a place to start: tweak it to measure the time for one run of an interesting workload on a fresh boot & login on both platforms. (This may not be the right test; "feels faster" is probably more of a latency/responsiveness thing than a total runtime thing, but perhaps this gets you thinking in the right direction). Show the numbers that prove your impression, and people will probably get much more interested. One thing I think SuSE does is more aggressive preloading of shared libraries: http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2004-07/msg00135.html Like anything, this has tradeoffs of course. But it's an example of one difference worth investigating. (Incidentally, in that thread, Ulrich asks for hard numbers to show the performance gain, if any. Detect a theme here?) :) -Eric -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
