2009/1/9 Stanislav Visnovsky <visnov@suse.cz>:
On Friday 09 January 2009 03:57:09 Larry Stotler wrote:
I run a server with 128MB. It don't need much to just serve up files.
I hope you've sent your hardware profile via smolt. I'm pretty sure the numbers there are the one people will look at when thinking about where to put the optimization efforts:
Noone's asked for desktop to be optimised to 256MB RAM, it's the word "requirement" and 1GB figure that looked like a very bad idea to me. Precisely because of SOHO server applications, and least according to most Internet pundits "it will never be the year of Linux on the destkop" so we shouldn't forget non-GUI server side :) Firefox 3 seems to have beneffitted a lot from the work to reduce memory consumption. I've noticed it on a machine with 4GB RAM (despite having AMD dual channel non-FSB memory controller), and the result is much more pleasant, than the flabby feel of the older version. Years ago memory access on first micro I used, was 1 or 2 CPU cycles. Now we have new chips with L3 caches taking 45 cycles, and system memory a lot more (100+?); so the old "memory is cheap and fast" meme doesn't hold so well now, even though memory is cheap, and faster thand it used to be, compared to processing speed increase it has lagged.
openSUSE and Linux's RAM needs have really gotten out of hand lately. I was running 10.2 on a PowerMac 7500/G4/700 with 256MB with no problem. Now I need 512 or it's slow as molasses. Not a good trend
To me Qt4 & KDE4 don't seem to have blown up memory requirements. Firefox 3 is working with less. But I can only compare 10.3 requirements on i686 with 11.1, not 10.2 directly. So am I the only who wonders about an issue under Power arch, or simple configuration issues like desktop search, despite fact that 512MB RAM is clearly a more sensible system size than 256MB? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org