Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 80

Thread: Linux hacker compares Solaris kernel code:

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    241

    Default

    Hey, 'kraftman', aka 'OpenSLOWlaris', aka 'BSDSucksDicks', aka 'i386reaper', aka 'Linux Anals Solaris', etc... SUCK THAT!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Not subscribing to this FUD-fest of a troll feast, so don't count on me coming back
    But it seems that just about everyone has entirely missed the point of what Con Kolivas wrote (two and a half years ago, so someone is dragging through ancient history):
    Now this would be a great time to take my comments out of context without reading on. The problem is that here was a scheduler that did exactly what I hate about what the Linux kernel scheduler is becoming. It's a monstrosity of epic proportions, and as far as an aircraft goes, it's like taking an Airbus A380 on a short joyride if you're running it on a desktop.
    ...
    So what do I think of it now? It looks like an excellent design for a completely different purpose. It's built like a commercial design for commercial purposes that have very different requirements than what most of us use Linux for, but it does appear to have been done so very well.
    Basically, it's tidy, and thorough, but overly thorough to the point of bloat. You can write code well and still get bloat.
    Kebbabert is taking it out of context, Pawlerson is falling for it and getting Con Kolivas's meaning backwards, and most of the other posters are just embarking on a trollfest that is related only to the operating systems involved.

    But by all means, carry on! I'd love it if Kebbabert can keep some of the trolls occupied outside the potentially interesting threads.

    ~A Linux user who's gotten disgusted by certain fudsters who attempt to promote Linux and thereby make it less attractive.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    241

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibidem View Post
    Not subscribing to this FUD-fest of a troll feast, so don't count on me coming back
    But it seems that just about everyone has entirely missed the point of what Con Kolivas wrote (two and a half years ago, so someone is dragging through ancient history):

    Basically, it's tidy, and thorough, but overly thorough to the point of bloat. You can write code well and still get bloat.
    Kebbabert is taking it out of context, Pawlerson is falling for it and getting Con Kolivas's meaning backwards, and most of the other posters are just embarking on a trollfest that is related only to the operating systems involved.

    But by all means, carry on! I'd love it if Kebbabert can keep some of the trolls occupied outside the potentially interesting threads.

    ~A Linux user who's gotten disgusted by certain fudsters who attempt to promote Linux and thereby make it less attractive.
    Well, even 10 years ago is not ancient history; like if a new scheduler came out ever week...

    So the Solaris code is much more than a casual user might need, but, as far as I know, Solaris is all about scaling. How'd it perform under the most demanding conditions, or in architectures from 20 years from now? Maybe it isn't so bloated after all if you think like this.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pawlerson View Post
    It's enough to check server and HPC market share.
    To see what is popular, yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pawlerson View Post
    They were dominated by UNIX, but Linux has wiped them out. It's such simple. The same when comes to stock exchanges which are one of the most demanding and critical workloads.
    Yes, that's nice and all, but why does this cause this trolling?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,086

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    No, Con is one of the best developers. He introduced BFS, that is much better scheduler for desktop systems. You don't want Linux on desktop?

    That said, I think he is very competent so he must be correct on topic.

    Also, remember that "better" is an enemy of "good". So in order to progress one must find weaknessess to be able to combat them.

    This is why in this angle criticism is very good. You don't kick out developers for criticism - this way you will end up with a bunch of "agree" types that can't improve anything, because they agree that current state is always good.
    There is not one single responsible person on the planet who would actually use BFS. The reality of it is that it is an epic bloody mess of contradictions that are guaranteed to explode in just about every circumstance. I have tried it, and it was a nightmare of hesitation and crashes.

    Secondly, you should never assume that your opponent is completely flawed and retarded. I'm sure that there are great things about the solaris code. Lots of them. As well as bad things.

    Not to say that Con isn't entitled to his views on the "neatness" of the solaris code, but one really has to wonder whether he was comparing it to the Linux code, or **his own**.
    Last edited by droidhacker; 05-06-2013 at 08:57 AM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,086

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Nille_kungen View Post
    This is what open source is about, to look at code and understand how others solved an problem and to be inspired.
    If someone made something nice then good for them.
    I can't understand the big fuss here.
    Exactly! (10chars)

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    No, Con is one of the best developers. He introduced BFS, that is much better scheduler for desktop systems. You don't want Linux on desktop?

    That said, I think he is very competent so he must be correct on topic.
    Not true at all. Linux on desktop is actually using CFS. I remember Con's scheduler in the past and it was disaster. 3D games were unplayable and sound has stuttered a lot. Afaik CFS was introduced in 2.6.23 and it has changed my desktop experience.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    To see what is popular, yes.
    To see what is better.

    Yes, that's nice and all, but why does this cause this trolling?
    It's simple: slowlaris folks and fanboys like Kebabbert can't accept an obvious fact that Linux wiped this OS out from nearly every market. The reason of trolling is envy.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sergio View Post
    Hey, 'kraftman', aka 'OpenSLOWlaris', aka 'BSDSucksDicks', aka 'i386reaper', aka 'Linux Anals Solaris', etc... SUCK THAT!
    Why do you think they're the same person? Is it because they hate solaris and bsd? Do I have to love them to not be considered as OpenSLOWlaris etc? Furthermore, if someone's trolling here it's Kebabbert who dig out very old Con's quote. Don't you see that? Or perhaps, you're only seeing when someone attacks everything except Linux?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    974

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pawlerson View Post
    Not true at all. Linux on desktop is actually using CFS. I remember Con's scheduler in the past and it was disaster. 3D games were unplayable and sound has stuttered a lot. Afaik CFS was introduced in 2.6.23 and it has changed my desktop experience.
    I use BFS on zenkernel in Debian. Maybe its time for a good benchmark of schedulers, not only in numbers but in application switch times etc, something that Michael can't do because it would require drifting outside of what PTS can measure.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •