[arch-general] Think twice before moving to systemd

Justin Strickland azriel.kiten at gmail.com
Fri Aug 17 00:50:48 EDT 2012


On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 01:22:09AM -0300, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 4:08 PM, John K Pate <j.k.pate at sms.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:16:31 +0200
> >> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:58 PM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
> >>> <denisfalqueto at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > This is so stupid that it's not even funny. You said that the problem
> >>> > was having CONFIG_HZ=300 and systemd. I said it is not, because I also
> >>> > have that situation and it works. So, your point is moot. I didn't say
> >>> > you don't have a problem, but just that it may be not related to
> >>> > CONFIG_HZ. I even sent you an article with ways on how to inspect the
> >>> > behaviour of systemd, which was completely ignored.
> >>>
> >>> My problem with CONFIG_HZ exists
> >>> independently of whether you experience the problem yourself or not.
> >>
> >> But it suggests that the problem is not *just* systemd and
> >> CONFIG_HZ=300. I am, and many others are, running systemd with
> >> CONFIG_HZ=300 fine.
> >
> > Show me two bootcharts, one with CONFIG_HZ_300=y, and another with
> > CONFIG_HZ_1000=y. Then I will believe that you are running systemd
> > fine. The other possibility is that you are just not noticing the
> > problem.
> 
> Chalange accepted.
> 
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9222479/bootchart-arch-hz300.png
> 
> Bootchart of 20 seconds, with Arch stock kernel, CONFIG_HZ=300. You
> can see that kdm is started in around 7 seconds after boot starts.
> 
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9222479/bootchart-ck-hz1000.png
> 
> Same length chart, with CK patchset kernel, from AUR package (some
> problems compiling stock kernel with CONFIG_HZ=1000, not related to
> systemd at all0. You'll be amazed to see kdm starting at around the
> same time.
> 
> Happy now?
> 
> -- 
> A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
> Q: Why is top posting so bad?
> For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html
> 
> -------------------------------------------
> Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
> Linux user #524555
> -------------------------------------------
+1


More information about the arch-general mailing list