Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 16th Nov 2010 22:48 UTC, submitted by Michael
Linux "In recent weeks and months there has been quite a bit of work towards improving the responsiveness of the Linux desktop with some very significant milestones building up recently and new patches continuing to come. This work is greatly improving the experience of the Linux desktop when the computer is withstanding a great deal of CPU load and memory strain. Fortunately, the exciting improvements are far from over. There is a new patch that has not yet been merged but has undergone a few revisions over the past several weeks and it is quite small - just over 200 lines of code - but it does wonders for the Linux desktop."
Thread beginning with comment 450256
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by tetek
by tetek on Wed 17th Nov 2010 09:04 UTC
tetek
Member since:
2010-10-04

I don't get it - it's big halo cause linux programmers just discover that writing good code gives you good performance or that linux kernel is seriously flawed and needs work ASAP? And all that whining "linux is the best" was bullshit? I really don't get it ;)

Reply Score: -5

RE: Comment by tetek
by Soulbender on Wed 17th Nov 2010 09:10 in reply to "Comment by tetek"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I really don't get it


That much is clear.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by tetek
by tetek on Wed 17th Nov 2010 10:01 in reply to "RE: Comment by tetek"
tetek Member since:
2010-10-04

Use arguments

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by tetek
by mansz on Wed 17th Nov 2010 09:15 in reply to "Comment by tetek"
mansz Member since:
2010-11-17

Well the thing is that Linus have always wanted the kernel to be as generic as possible so he did not want to put in to may scheduler in the Linux kernel. And since Linux is developed not only to run on a desktop the scheduler have not always been optimized for desktop use. Windows and probably OSX scheduler have alway been prioritized GUI processes before the none GUI processes but this is an area that Linux have been lacking. There is patches for this but Linus did not want them to be part of the kernel since he do not want to may schedulers. This patch should probably solve this issue.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by tetek
by lemur2 on Wed 17th Nov 2010 09:20 in reply to "Comment by tetek"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

I don't get it - it's big halo cause linux programmers just discover that writing good code gives you good performance or that linux kernel is seriously flawed and needs work ASAP? And all that whining "linux is the best" was bullshit? I really don't get it ;)


The performance of the Linux kernel is absolutely fine for some kinds of roles. World best, in fact.

Backup:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/microsoft-breaks-petaflo...
Microsoft says a Windows-based supercomputer has broken the petaflop speed barrier, but the achievement is not being recognized by the group that tracks the world's fastest supercomputers, because the same machine was able to achieve higher speeds using Linux.


In that case, Windows HPC would have made the top 5 in the highest-performing supercomputer listsing (which BTW is dominated by Linux machines) for the first time had it not been for the fact that Linux performed better on the same machine.

Having said all of that ... it should be noted that Linux to date has not been particularly well optimised for desktop loads. This patch helps considerably to get around that, apparently.

Perhaps with this patch desktop Linux will henceforth perform better on the same hardware than desktop Windows, just as has been the case before this point in time for embedded Linux vs embedded Windows, server Linux vs server Windows, and HPC Linux vs HPC Windows.

Edited 2010-11-17 09:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by tetek
by Kebabbert on Wed 17th Nov 2010 11:58 in reply to "RE: Comment by tetek"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

"I don't get it - it's big halo cause linux programmers just discover that writing good code gives you good performance or that linux kernel is seriously flawed and needs work ASAP? And all that whining "linux is the best" was bullshit? I really don't get it ;)


The performance of the Linux kernel is absolutely fine for some kinds of roles. World best, in fact.

Backup:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/microsoft-breaks-petaflo...
Microsoft says a Windows-based supercomputer has broken the petaflop speed barrier, but the achievement is not being recognized by the group that tracks the world's fastest supercomputers, because the same machine was able to achieve higher speeds using Linux.
"
This is not a valid conclusion. It says nothing about other OSes, such as Solaris.

This only proves that Linux is faster than Windows. This does not prove that Linux is fastest in the world, nor World's best.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by tetek
by lucas_maximus on Wed 17th Nov 2010 12:59 in reply to "RE: Comment by tetek"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

You should read this mate ...

http://www.tmrepository.com/about/

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by tetek
by Stratoukos on Wed 17th Nov 2010 15:40 in reply to "RE: Comment by tetek"
Stratoukos Member since:
2009-02-11

From the article you linked:

The Tsubame team ran their Top 500 benchmarking tests on both Linux and Windows, and the difference in performance was less than 5% but Linux did come out on top, Hilf says. Hilf attributes Linux's slim victory to the Tokyo researchers running the Linux tests on a slightly larger number of nodes. I'm not sure why the tests were run on a different number of nodes, but I will be interviewing Matsuoka at this week's SC10 supercomputing conference in New Orleans and will attempt to find out.

I think I know why. It's because on a machine that probably needs millions of dollars just to flip the switch, there are more important things than just nailing a benchmark.

I don't know if Linux is more efficient than Windows in HPC, but the article you linked doesn't say much either.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by tetek
by morglum666 on Wed 17th Nov 2010 21:04 in reply to "RE: Comment by tetek"
morglum666 Member since:
2005-07-06

In shocking news, operating systems that don't maintain a 20+ year compatibility run faster than ones that do.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by tetek
by korpenkraxar on Wed 17th Nov 2010 10:11 in reply to "Comment by tetek"
korpenkraxar Member since:
2005-09-10

Good code was made better. Trolls move along.

Reply Parent Score: 5