Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

sepht · 2005-07-09 02:50:17

I wanted to post something, and since I don't want to think.. here's something I wasted yesterday on:

Linux Bootcharts, Slackware, Ubuntu, Arch, FC3, FC4
its done with bootchart... I just had time, tried to be as fair, posted every possible variable difference in the notes.

EDIT: Gentoo is now on there too.

iBertus · 2005-07-09 02:59:11

can't believe that FC4 came up in second place.

sepht · 2005-07-09 03:05:57

bootchart was utilized like mad in the FC4 dev process, FC3's results were so bad, they worked extra hard to fix it.
I really find the amount of FC critisizism undeserved
the FC guys are constantly working against whatever problems arise yum has gotten to be a pretty good package manager in FC4.
If all the installs, FC4 was the most pain-free install and upgrade(since i had the wireless script already, otherwise arch would have won) I still prefer Arch's not filled with crap approach, but I really like the work the FC guys have done, not only with graphical tools, but with java, SELinux, porting eclipse to gcj, etc.
Hell FC5 plans call for a new init system, better laptop support, and more yum intergration, especially in anaconda, and better gcj support for things like azuereus.

ozar · 2005-07-09 03:15:13

Hey, that's interesting - thanks for posting it. Arch always seem to boot fast for me, too.

iBertus · 2005-07-09 04:36:18

i've used FC and find it to be a great distro for people that need a well polished linux environment. my experience was with FC2, FC3 and so i was just shocked to see the difference.

CyberTron · 2005-07-09 06:12:43

I have tried FC4 and Ubuntu when trying to decide which distro I should use in my class later on, but it felt slow, compared to slack and escpeially arch, (decided to go with slackware since arch is "the next step", I will however introduce arch to them in the end of the semester...:D

btw, it was a very nice comparison, good work

iBertus · 2005-07-09 06:16:45

yes, thanks for putting together that comparison. must have been a pain in the ass!

sepht · 2005-07-09 10:14:01

no problem, the pain in the ass comes next week when I get time to add gentoo into this...

CyberTron · 2005-07-09 10:19:12

sepht wrote:

no problem, the pain in the ass comes next week when I get time to add gentoo into this...

hahaha, well do you realllly have the time to install a full gentoo !! wow, I can think of better ways spending that time

sepht · 2005-07-09 10:21:28

Ah, but after the time-wasting install(with extra timewasting features like stage1) I'll be able to get proof of not only boot time but other benchmarks, that Gentoo really ISN'T as fast as people may like to think, or maybe that it is, I'll just have to see.

cactus · 2005-07-09 15:59:24

the thing about benchmarking a non-binary distro is...people will always say, "omg! you should have used --omg-optimize AND --omg-sif-n00bz for compiling...you made is slower on purpose!" and stuff like that.

Still, I would like to see the results. Thanks for all the hard work..just be ready for a little flamage if you release the results to the 'net at large.

ozar · 2005-07-09 16:34:38

Yeah, cactus is right - someone will complain no matter what you do... especially if their distro isn't shown to be the fastest at booting.

Still it's a fun project, and I look forward to seeing the additional graphs, too. 8)

sepht · 2005-07-09 18:20:25

Thats why I'm doing a stage one and doing the most reasonable, rational compile tags.
march, O2, pipe, formit frame, funrolls, mmx, sse, for use, I'm thinking about ntpl, I mean.. nowhere does to recomend to use NTPL which is a shame..

On technologies gentoo is quickly aging.. its one of the few DevFS only distros, and doesn't utilize NTPL, heck even slack current does.

sarah31 · 2005-07-09 18:56:16

You shouldn't be booting your computer on a daily basis. I never understood why boot time is such a big deal. You get almost any computer using whatevver OS to boot faster depending on how well you know the system and control just what it is bringing up at boot time.

It is like the processor speed freaks. Unless you are doubling the speed of your processor you will hardly be able to realize most incremental speed increases. Hell if you want to have your system working at its peak it is not always a matter of overclocking or whatever it is cramming it full of RAM that will often get you the best speed/performance bumps.

sepht · 2005-07-09 19:17:38

I reboot mine every day, I don't need it running during the night, buzzing right in my ear..

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-07-09 20:59:03

I see your still using that horrid geocities site...

However, I find the results quite interesting. I thought slack would be a lot closer to arch if not slightly faster to boot up.

sepht · 2005-07-09 21:36:40

maybe -current is buggered for slackware :-/

the geocities site is just the HTML lol, images are setup on imageshack lol

Duke · 2005-07-10 06:01:01

I'm sure boot times are important for a number of people. I for one can't stand that buzzing either, so I reboot my machine a whole bunch of times a day. I'm a student and have my computer in my bedroom, so I'm not going to leave it on while, say my girlfriend is over, nor will I leave it on while I'm sleeping.

Oh, and I'm sure everyone has been about to go out to the movies, but forgot to check the times and need to boot up that PC of yours in a hurry, or maybe you forgot to check the bus/metro route to get to (insert important meeting here) and you have to turn on that machine of yours and check online.

There are always going to be people that STILL reboot their systems, just like there are STILL people using dialup, or STILL watching broadcast TV (not even basic cable unfortunately)...

TheDoctor · 2005-07-11 21:01:49

Euphoric Nightmare wrote:

I see your still using that horrid geocities site...
However, I find the results quite interesting. I thought slack would be a lot closer to arch if not slightly faster to boot up.

I found that Slacks hotplug ran really slow compared to Arch. If you take that out and load everything manually, then it's alright in speed.
I never really bothered to find out why this is though.

arooaroo · 2005-07-11 21:35:11

One problem that someone pointed out was that the different distros were installed on different partitions. IO performance differs purely due to physical location on the same hard disk.

Something to think about, especially if you are to introduce the micro-second obsessed Gentoo crowd to the show.

iphitus · 2005-07-12 02:21:48

sarah31 wrote:

You shouldn't be booting your computer on a daily basis. I never understood why boot time is such a big deal. You get almost any computer using whatevver OS to boot faster depending on how well you know the system and control just what it is bringing up at boot time.
It is like the processor speed freaks. Unless you are doubling the speed of your processor you will hardly be able to realize most incremental speed increases. Hell if you want to have your system working at its peak it is not always a matter of overclocking or whatever it is cramming it full of RAM that will often get you the best speed/performance bumps.

I'm a laptop user, I use my laptop at school, boot time makes a big difference.

Everyone always forgets the laptop users.....

Dusty · 2005-07-12 02:25:56

iphitus wrote:

sarah31 wrote:
You shouldn't be booting your computer on a daily basis./quote]
I'm a laptop user, I use my laptop at school, boot time makes a big difference.
Everyone always forgets the laptop users.....
Or the users who have to sleep beside their desktops... or the users who have to survive in a very hot room and would prefer to have their CPU adding to that heat when its actually in use.
Dusty

** Arch Linux Apparel and more ** Arch Linux stickers, laptop bags, jewelery ** I wrote a book on Python 3 ** and one on mental health **

Arch Linux

#1 2005-07-09 02:50:17

Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#2 2005-07-09 02:59:11

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#3 2005-07-09 03:05:57

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#4 2005-07-09 03:15:13

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#5 2005-07-09 04:36:18

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#6 2005-07-09 06:12:43

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#7 2005-07-09 06:16:45

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#8 2005-07-09 10:14:01

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#9 2005-07-09 10:19:12

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#10 2005-07-09 10:21:28

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#11 2005-07-09 15:59:24

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#12 2005-07-09 16:34:38

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#13 2005-07-09 18:20:25

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#14 2005-07-09 18:56:16

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#15 2005-07-09 19:17:38

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#16 2005-07-09 20:59:03

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#17 2005-07-09 21:36:40

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#18 2005-07-10 06:01:01

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#19 2005-07-11 21:01:49

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#20 2005-07-11 21:35:11

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#21 2005-07-12 02:21:48

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#22 2005-07-12 02:25:56

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#23 2005-07-12 06:10:37

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#24 2005-07-12 06:31:44

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

#25 2005-07-12 07:42:28

Re: Distro Boot-time Comparison(Now With Gentoo results)

Board footer