rc improvements (wanted?)
Alexander Leidinger
Alexander at Leidinger.net
Fri Jul 18 12:12:30 UTC 2008
Quoting Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy at optushome.com.au> (from Fri, 18 Jul
2008 17:18:07 +1000):
> On 2008-Jul-18 08:37:25 +0200, Alexander Leidinger
> <Alexander at Leidinger.net> wrote:
>> Are you aware that the parallel starting in Solaris 10 reduced the
>> booting time by a nice percentage?
>
> Given that Solaris boots in geologic time, this probably wouldn't
> be difficult.
How do you define "booting Solaris"? Do you include the extensive
tests prior to loading the kernel into this? I'm not talking about the
time a 25k needs (even when you reducing the amount of testing on the
system controller, it takes a long while until it reaches a state
which I would call the start of the boot of the OS). We are talking
about the pure userland part of booting. What is done during the
startup of important programs in Solaris is not unreasonable (and
similar/comparable between Solaris versions), and still, there's a
nice difference between Solaris 9 and 10 if you count the time until
you can start to do useful stuff.
>> If yes, do you expect that FreeBSD
>> behaves significantly different or do you "just" want to see numbers?
>
> Parallel starting is not guaranteed to be an improvement. Starting a
> whole pile of processes that are I/O bound during initialisation
> (think squid or some databases) may be worse than starting them one
> at a time. Likewise, a whole pile of processes that are CPU bound
It depends, think about independent disks and or keeping the squid
data in RAM (e.g. tmpfs).
But this doesn't matter, we will always be able to come up with
situations where the parallel start is not a good idea. We don't come
by default with such a situation and I'm sure a lot of configs out
there that don't fall into this class. Based upon your argument we
could say we can not enable parallel starting even if we see it is an
improvement for the reboot after the installation.
What I wanted to know is if there's an substantial argument (it can
not behave similar to Solaris, because of A and B), or if he "just"
wants to know what the difference on FreeBSD is.
> will just thrash the scheduler. (Though parallel starting of I/O and
> CPU bound processes should be a win).
You forgot about round-trip-time bound processes (basically processes
which wait for an event to occur before they say they are successfully
started), and we have several of them.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
Those who hate and fight must stop themselves -- otherwise it is not
stopped.
-- Spock, "Day of the Dove", stardate unknown
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list