Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 11th May 2013 21:41 UTC
Windows "Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening." That's one way to start an insider explanation of why Windows' performance isn't up to snuff. Written by someone who actually contributes code to the Windows NT kernel, the comment on Hacker News, later deleted but reposted with permission on Marc Bevand's blog, paints a very dreary picture of the state of Windows development. The root issue? Think of how Linux is developed, and you'll know the answer.
Thread beginning with comment 561505
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Too funny
by Soulbender on Tue 14th May 2013 08:53 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Too funny"
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

You don't think that it is absurd to have 4 binaries essentially doing the same thing in different ways, rather than a single uniform method?


They don't do the same thing. Really. They do 4 different things, well 3 if you combine cron and at.
corn/at and syslog has NOTHING in common. They do NOTHING that is the same. Really, I find it odd that you'd think they do.
What's absurd is combining these 4 (or 3) apps that does completely different things into one.

Browse around /etc/events.d or whatever, you will notice they are scripts doing the same sorts of things as old init files.


There's no events.d that is part of upstart.

Yes, they do, because without a strong community, these companies understand they would limit their capabilities.


If you think they do you're seriously deluded. They're looking out for their own interests, nothing else.

They don't though, they all manage services.


uh, no they don't NONE of them is managing services. Cron schedules *jobs*, syslog writes logs messages, logrotate rotates log files. They do not manage services.

if you don't think rsyslog needs to communicate with each daemon to ensure correct information, you are fooling yourself.


That's what API's are for and there already is one for syslog.

If you had any real experience maintaining a Linux network, you would understand the frustration of the unpredictability of logs


I do and logs is a problem to which there are many good existing solutions, most of them better than the proposed systemd solution. Which you would have known if you had "real experience managing a Linux network".

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Too funny
by Lunitik on Tue 14th May 2013 14:56 in reply to "RE[6]: Too funny"
Lunitik Member since:
2005-08-07

They don't do the same thing. Really. They do 4 different things, well 3 if you combine cron and at.
corn/at and syslog has NOTHING in common. They do NOTHING that is the same. Really, I find it odd that you'd think they do.


What is the purpose of syslog without something to monitor? What is the purpose of at, cron, init, or xinetd without something to start and stop?

What's absurd is combining these 4 (or 3) apps that does completely different things into one.


As opposed to having 4 utterly different codebases, and all the reproduction of efforts that implies?

There's no events.d that is part of upstart.


Now you just look ignorant.

$ cd /etc/events.d

Look at the files in there.

If you think they do you're seriously deluded. They're looking out for their own interests, nothing else.


It is in their best interests to work with the community, this is what you're missing.

uh, no they don't NONE of them is managing services. Cron schedules *jobs*, syslog writes logs messages, logrotate rotates log files. They do not manage services.


What is a job if not a service? You seem to have a very strange definition of what a service is.

If you don't think logging is a part of service management, I don't even know what to tell you. If I cannot keep track of services, management itself is simply impossible.

That's what API's are for and there already is one for syslog.


You'd think so, right?

You'd be mistaken, there are attempts to standardize the format but there is no API definition. Essentially, things are just farting text out of std[out,err] and syslog is throwing that raw into a file. It simply doesn't care what that info is, how it is formatted, nothing.

I do and logs is a problem to which there are many good existing solutions, most of them better than the proposed systemd solution. Which you would have known if you had "real experience managing a Linux network".


Please show me a solution which is as seamless as journald over the network. They are all hacks which try to address the shortcomings of syslog.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: Too funny
by phoenix on Tue 14th May 2013 17:27 in reply to "RE[7]: Too funny"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

"They don't do the same thing. Really. They do 4 different things, well 3 if you combine cron and at.
corn/at and syslog has NOTHING in common. They do NOTHING that is the same. Really, I find it odd that you'd think they do.


What is the purpose of syslog without something to monitor?
"

syslog doesn't "monitor" anything. It receives log messages from other processes and either writes them to a log file, or sends them across a network to another syslog.

What is the purpose of at, cron, init, or xinetd without something to start and stop?


at/cron runs processes at specific times.

xinetd listens on sockets and forks processes as needed.

Not even close to the same thing.

"There's no events.d that is part of upstart.


Now you just look ignorant.

$ cd /etc/events.d

Look at the files in there.
"

Kubuntu 12.10:
$ ls /etc/events.d
ls: cannot access /etc/events.d: No such file or directory

Huh, so if Canonical is using upstart, and events.d doesn't exist on a Canonical system, wouldn't that imply that events.d is not part of upstart?

Reply Parent Score: 2