If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
I really like where the low level plumbing in Linux is going in systemd. It is rapidly unifying the low level Linux infrastructure and meaningless differences between the distro's are disappearing. This is the much needed boost userspace needs to get more programs developed for Linux. In a systemd future you don't have to build 9 different packages to service the different distro's. Maybe you need to put your package in 9 different containers, but the underlying Linux system will be largely identical.
I really like where the low level plumbing in Linux is going in systemd. It is rapidly unifying the low level Linux infrastructure and meaningless differences between the distro's are disappearing. This is the much needed boost userspace needs to get more programs developed for Linux. In a systemd future you don't have to build 9 different packages to service the different distro's. Maybe you need to put your package in 9 different containers, but the underlying Linux system will be largely identical.
Definitely. As a software dev I hate fractured/multiple solutions with a passion. And systemd typically also provides a better alternative.
I wonder what network software is systemd about to replace? I'm clueless about the (Linux / any OS) network stacks.
Definitely. As a software dev I hate fractured/multiple solutions with a passion. And systemd typically also provides a better alternative.
I wonder what network software is systemd about to replace? I'm clueless about the (Linux / any OS) network stacks.
As for systemd-networkd it's not about to replace something rather it fills a gap. It's primarily aimed at managing networking inside containers. All the other network daemons like NetworkManager are huge and bloated (NM is bigger than all of systemd combined probably) and are designed for desktop interactivity.
And for the end user, I'm having a pretty great time as well. My boot speeds are noticably faster - really pleasant and I'm on some old SATA drives. My network is resumed so much faster, too.
And for the end user, I'm having a pretty great time as well. My boot speeds are noticably faster - really pleasant and I'm on some old SATA drives. My network is resumed so much faster, too.
I use it on my desktop PC, where I have just a simply DHCP ethernet connection. It acquires a lease in 5 ms instead of 500-600 ms with network manager. On my laptop I need to manage wifi and ethernet connections which require authorization so I have to use NetworkManager for that.
Imagine a company spinning up thousand of containers every day 365 days a year. Having the container up and running 500 ms faster sums up to hundreds of hours where these services can actually make money. Companies will love systemd-networkd.
Last edited by blackout23; 02 November 2014, 01:41 PM.
As for systemd-networkd it's not about to replace something rather it fills a gap. It's primarily aimed at managing networking inside containers. All the other network daemons like NetworkManager are huge and bloated (NM is bigger than all of systemd combined probably) and are designed for desktop interactivity.
NM has grown a whole bunch of server oriented features including bridging etc and hardly desktop specific anymore. Having said that, systemd-networkd doesn't have any wifi capabilities yet. So one is not a complete replacement for another.
Comment