Jerry McBride wrote: > On Wednesday 23 August 2006 18:42, Daniel Iliev wrote: > >> Jerry McBride wrote: >> >>> Would some kind soul save me a bit of research time? Which of the two >>> alternative init schemes are faster, initng or runit? >>> >>> >>> Thank you in advance , Jerry >>> >> I have tried initng several months ago. It rocks. It's several times >> faster then the "normal" init. The problem at the time was there were no >> scripts for everything I wanted to start automatically. So one day I >> figured out that writing scripts and using faster init takes me more >> time then using slower init which works with almost no maintenance. This >> made me go back to the normal init. I have to say that while using >> initng I noticed that many scripts were added for a relatively short >> time. It is possible that now there are initng scripts for most of the >> services one would ever use, but you have to check it out for yourself. >> >> I can't say a word about "runit", because it's the first time I read >> about it. >> >> My next experiment for speeding the boot up will be fcache, but I'm >> waiting for a proper mood to try it ( it means: "I'm too lazy" ) >> >> > > Hi Daniel, > > Fcache works, but we didn't see the performance boost that going to initng > gave. Since it requires it's very own ext3 partition to work, plus a kernel > patch... we dropped it. > > Using initng is the ticket... Maybe the gentoo devs will directly support it > or a variant someday... > > Cheers, Jerry > > > > Thanks, Jerry
I appreciate this info about fcache. Now I have a good idea of what I have to expect. I've got some unpartitioned space and nothing prevents me to do some tests. The only question that I have is how much space does fcache need? BTW, the "ck-sources", which can be found in the portage comes with several performance related patches. Emerge automatically applies these patches and fcache is among them. -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
