LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 07-10-2017, 09:27 AM   #46
cwizardone
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib." FreeBSD.
Posts: 3,450
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 842Reputation: 842Reputation: 842Reputation: 842Reputation: 842Reputation: 842Reputation: 842

Quote:
Originally Posted by a4z View Post
...note that there are some events that could trigger an akonadi start, like calender reminders or some features via ALT+F2....
Thanks for the link. Good information.
I use removepkg to uninstall akonadi, but that doesn't, for whatever reason, remove akonadi, so I use a file manager to go into /usr/bin, as root, and delete all related akonadi files.
Many KDE "services" can be turned off from the "service manager" found under the heading "Startup and Shutdown" in the system settings.
 
Old 07-10-2017, 10:57 AM   #47
wpeckham
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Continental USA
Distribution: Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, RedHat, DSL, Puppy, CentOS, Knoppix, Mint-DE, Sparky, Vsido, tinycore, Q4OS
Posts: 2,199

Rep: Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885
What I think might be more helpful (in the long run) would be a comparison of the memory taken up running only normal services when X is NOT running (base). Perhaps with no DE even installed. Then also against the default install WITH the default DE running.

A comparison of the different DE environments on one or two different distributions with all other factors isolated would be of value.

This would isolate the load from the base with services against the base, services, and DE. That study could then be used for picking a distribution and installing the desktop with the feature and load profile required for the individual use case.

I wish that I had time right now, this sounds like a fun and useful (and TIME consuming) project.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 07-10-2017, 11:09 AM   #48
orbea
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 652

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
That won't be helpful unless you also test a wide variety of different hardware configurations too. Unless the only thing you care about is your own hardware of course.
 
Old 07-10-2017, 11:25 AM   #49
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 4,478

Rep: Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403Reputation: 1403
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpeckham View Post
A comparison of the different DE environments on one or two different distributions with all other factors isolated would be of value.
The same DE can be very different in different distros. The last time I tried that sort of experiment, Fedora was using more than twice as much RAM as Slackware for KDE; for Xfce, Black Lab used twice as much as MX.

Running everything available* on Salix, Icewm had only 40% of the RAM usage of KDE. I don't seem to have recorded the usage of Ratpoison, though!
* i.e. Icewm, Fluxbox, Pekwm, Windowmaker, LXDE, Enlightenment, Mate, Xfce, KDE.
 
Old 07-10-2017, 01:22 PM   #50
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,411

Rep: Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769Reputation: 2769
I didn't bother looking at the comparison. Did it take the information here (about how to actually read RAM usage) into account?

http://www.linuxatemyram.com/
 
Old 07-10-2017, 01:53 PM   #51
Darth Vader
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 1,089

Rep: Reputation: 406Reputation: 406Reputation: 406Reputation: 406Reputation: 406
Usually, in my work desktop, the Firefox eat about 2500MB RAM, with its several hundred tabs and pages open.

Make a difference if the plain desktop eat 350MB or 240MB memory?

Last edited by Darth Vader; 07-10-2017 at 01:55 PM.
 
Old 07-10-2017, 03:29 PM   #52
LuckyCyborg
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2010
Posts: 152

Rep: Reputation: 27
Hundred tabs? You are kidding!

I know a site where a page from image galleries allocate 1GB clean and simple. I beat you in 3 tabs!
 
Old 07-10-2017, 08:20 PM   #53
NoStressHQ
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Geneva - Switzerland ( Bordeaux - France / Montreal - QC - Canada)
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 - 32/64bit
Posts: 558

Rep: Reputation: 187Reputation: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by un1x View Post
Debian 9 XFCE (345 MB)

TOTALLY FALSE !

************************

here , usin Debian sid XFCE ( new install ) . . . where the hell are the 345 mb ? ? ?

Maybe you shouldn't have launch firefox ? Neither should have launch a graphical tool to measure memory if you want it to be "tiny"...

Last edited by NoStressHQ; 07-10-2017 at 08:21 PM.
 
Old 07-11-2017, 03:47 PM   #54
un1x
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2015
Posts: 502

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoStressHQ View Post
Maybe you shouldn't have launch firefox ? Neither should have launch a graphical tool to measure memory if you want it to be "tiny"...
Comparison says :

Code:
(system, Firefox, file manager and terminal emulator launched)
 
Old 07-11-2017, 04:02 PM   #55
Darth Vader
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 1,089

Rep: Reputation: 406Reputation: 406Reputation: 406Reputation: 406Reputation: 406
Honestly, I believe that Firefox alone, with one tab open in a site with moderate memory requirements like LQ, alone eat about 2-300MB.

What you claim, about that over 1GB memory peak, is way too much. Yet, what the guy claim in his benchmark is way too, well... basic numbers.

Last edited by Darth Vader; 07-11-2017 at 04:05 PM.
 
Old 07-11-2017, 04:15 PM   #56
IsaacKuo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
Distribution: Debian 9 Stretch
Posts: 1,821
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 220Reputation: 220Reputation: 220
Based on the screenshot, it's not Debian (not running stock Debian systemd, at least), and it's not Debian 9 (unstable Sid, rather than stable Stretch), and it's running freaking gnome-system-monitor, which is cool looking but good lord it loads up half of GNOME3 due to its dependencies. And I'm guessing it's using GDM3 rather than LightDM (which is what Debian XFCE4 uses out-of-box), so that'll load up even more GNOME3. So you're looking at a whole bunch of GNOME3 and XFCE4 loaded up into RAM, and who knows what the heck Firefox is loaded up with considering all of the rest!

That said, it's easy to gobble up over 1GB of RAM with Firefox and a single tab, if that tab is Netflix. But grumble grumble grumble...like I said already, I've spent too much of my time and effort trying to get Netflix running on computers with less RAM than reasonable (evidently).
 
Old 07-12-2017, 03:25 AM   #57
SCerovec
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Cp6uja
Distribution: Slackware on x86 and arm
Posts: 1,089
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 130Reputation: 130
Thumbs down

Sadly,
I came here interested in the result, accustomed to LQ quality reviews:

1. Disappointed to the topic and author referred to in OP (further "OP")
2. Reassured LQ is still the best lead forum there is (kudos!)
3. Saddened how the respected (and admired) members failed to see the forest from the trees:

In GNU/Lnux the RAM usage (so read usability) is differently calculated than on those other OSes

Most waste of RAM is not to use some of the available amount:

This means, having lower RAM 'usage' is bad performance.



So, for instance, Slackware loads quite some of the later (regularly) needed stuff at boot time with
Code:
ldconfig
which 'punishes' the boot by ~22 sec (or quite less on latest solid state storage)
Consequentially, once loaded, the content serves each subsequent access to it - a magnitude faster...

The "OP", failing to pick Slackware in the list, speaks more about his mileage in Linux than the list alone breaks new to the world.

Leaving out an baseline series of test - how did he(she?) pick the amount or RAM for the VM, where the swap(s) omitted or not (swappiness; swap pressure) etc...



RE: off topic:
4 million years you say?
I'll propose you check what lasts 4 million seconds?

My bet is: out world is not older than 10k years, and, as time goes by, evidence mounts in my favor...
 
Old 07-12-2017, 06:29 AM   #58
wpeckham
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Continental USA
Distribution: Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, RedHat, DSL, Puppy, CentOS, Knoppix, Mint-DE, Sparky, Vsido, tinycore, Q4OS
Posts: 2,199

Rep: Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885
#1 GREAT that you are so enthusiastic about slackware. IT is a great and unique distribution.

#2 Sad that you are so dismissive of all other distributions. There are so very many that NO totally encompassing comparison has ever been made, or CAN ever be made, without being quite obsolete before it is published.

The comparison that was the basis for this thread did not claim to be anything like complete, it was based upon an earlier comparison of only FIVE distributions that the author happens to use often. He expanded it to 20 for the second article. With only 20 our of over 400 total (nearly 300 currently active) distributions in the pipeline that fit his criteria, the chance that he would happen to include YOUR favorite is far from 100%. But far better than your chance to hit on the lottery.)

That is no reason to get upset with the author or the community here. This is the kind of result to be expected in this large a community with so many Linux based distributions.
If you want an article that compares a different set of distributions, parameters, or methods I suggest that you perform those tests and post your results.
 
Old 07-14-2017, 09:16 AM   #59
un1x
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2015
Posts: 502

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by orbea View Post
Code:
412.8 MiB +   5.1 MiB = 417.8 MiB	 spacefm 
can't be ! insane ! !
 
Old 07-14-2017, 12:27 PM   #60
wpeckham
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Continental USA
Distribution: Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, RedHat, DSL, Puppy, CentOS, Knoppix, Mint-DE, Sparky, Vsido, tinycore, Q4OS
Posts: 2,199

Rep: Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885
Quote:
Originally Posted by un1x View Post
can't be ! insane ! !
Not insane, just inexact. Keep in mind that memory is in bytes, and you are rounding to nearest .1 MB or roughly nearest 100,000 bytes. That is less than perfectly precise, but good enough for most purposes.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RAM consumption by Gcore dipanchatterjee Linux - Newbie 6 01-15-2017 02:52 PM
[Xfce] Some processes are spawned multiple times, high RAM consumption Nh3xus Slackware 7 12-26-2013 09:29 PM
Slackware14-64 Internet is very slow in comparison to other Linux distros. WhiteyMcQ-Tip Slackware 3 03-21-2013 06:43 PM
[SOLVED] Linux distros comparison (stability, speed, security) alanv Linux - Newbie 24 11-09-2010 11:23 PM
SUSE- reduce ram consumption MTBer Linux - Software 7 04-14-2006 10:21 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:01 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration