10.2 Has Only Smp Kernel?

nope, run any benchmarks? smp on non-smp is slower and really makes not much sense (suse is not a speed daemon anyway). running smp on non-smp is not really smart. problems with wireless, nvidia and a lot of other modules.
besides: default does not mean only smp.
One more idiotic move anyway (first was zen)
[/b]

I don't agree with your statements. If you are running a single cpu then the smp code is unused code. It will increase the size of the load module. It will potentially take a insignificant amount of memory but if it doesn't run the code it's not going to slow anything down. I can see some possible issues with 3rd party modules that don't handle smp well.

If I have to pick one side or the other and the choices are 1) You calling the decision idiotic with no basis and 2) the developers who are actively coding the new release I think I'm going to go with option 2. I'm going to have to assume they took all the issues into consideration before making their decision.

It's also not my or anyone else's responsability to provide YOU with benchmarks. You asked what the references were for me stating that opensuse was going to one kernel and I provided them. You have issues with the fact they are going to one cpu..take it up with the developers or better yet..become one of the developers and you can tell them all the reasons you believe it is a bad decision.

In the end, the best choice is what I stated in my first post. Compile your own kernel.

I don't agree with your statements. If you are running a single cpu then the smp code is unused code. It will increase the size of the load module. It will potentially take a insignificant amount of memory but if it doesn't run the code it's not going to slow anything down. I can see some possible issues with 3rd party modules that don't handle smp well.[/b]

Well simply run few cpu intensive benchmarks please (for hew hours). In fact even HT has some serious issues with performance under heavy loads, so in fact it is advised to turn HT off.

About consideration: ask them how much they "considered" about introducing zen which has not only stability issues, but also third of Yast PM functionality (which defies all of the arguments about "enterprise readiness").

It's also not my or anyone else's responsability to provide YOU with benchmarks.[/b]

Not sure about benchmarks in YOU? Simply download sources install and run. I don't see why benchmarks should be in YOU in the first place.


You have provided references and I have quoted kernel sources.

In the end, the best choice is what I stated in my first post. Compile your own kernel.[/b]

Yes I never run suse kernels, so it does not affect me at all.

Not sure about benchmarks in YOU? Simply download sources install and run. I don't see why benchmarks should be in YOU in the first place.[/b]

Are you okay? :lol:

Are you okay?[/b]

you are right :lol:
either YOU YOU or YOU you.

I guess YOU is not always YOU

Taken from the suse 10.2 alpha 4 announcement here:

http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-announc...9/msg00000.html

* We switched to kernel 2.6.18rc5 - and use only SMP kernel, the
default kernel is smp, the kernel-smp is now dropped. Now all
kernel module packages (kmp) and the Xen packages have been adopted
for the new kernel.
SMP kernel runs fine on non SMP hardware..and before you ask...how do I know..I've had it installed before on single processor pc's.

Good enough?
[/b]

Whatever the case is, I will definitely stop using SuSE should I experience even the slightest drop in performance in the final release of 10.2 vs my current installation. I'm very particular about processing performance and the reason why I chose OpenSuSE 10.1 over Ubuntu Dapper is because I'm getting a higher graphical FPS stat in OpenSuSE than in Ubuntu, in additions to my programs starting up faster. And yeah, I've tried installing the 686 kernel in Ubuntu, and it still seem to lose out to OpenSuSE as far as performance is concerned. I'm avoiding Gentoo cuz of the often-heard stability issues. I'm using a Pentium 4 2.4GHz without HT.

Fedora Core or Mandriva looks promising.

Whatever the case is, I will definitely stop using SuSE should I experience even the slightest drop in performance in the final release of 10.2 vs my current installation. I'm very particular about processing performance and the reason why I chose OpenSuSE 10.1 over Ubuntu Dapper is because I'm getting a higher graphical FPS stat in OpenSuSE than in Ubuntu, in additions to my programs starting up faster. And yeah, I've tried installing the 686 kernel in Ubuntu, and it still seem to lose out to OpenSuSE as far as performance is concerned. I'm avoiding Gentoo cuz of the often-heard stability issues. I'm using a Pentium 4 2.4GHz without HT.

Fedora Core or Mandriva looks promising.
[/b]

I will repeat, "OpenSuSE 10.2 rc4 is in DEVELOPMENT"; stable is SuSE 10.1".
You should expect bugs with OpenSuSE 10.2.

In fact, for the month of October, there are 639 bug posts reported and it is only the 3rd day of the month.
There are a lot of folks all over the world hard at work trying to fix them. Yeah, they are all volunteers; that's what makes it great!

You should install OpenSuSE 10.2 on your system only to help provide feedback to help fix the problems; Not to run it as a production system.

The stable release of OpenSuSE 10.2 is scheduled for 5 December.

Have fun and report the bugs @ http://en.opensuse.org/Submitting_Bug_Reports.
The OpenSuSE 10.2 bug mailing list is @ http://lists.opensuse.org/archive/opensuse-bugs/.

I will repeat, "OpenSuSE 10.2 rc4 is in DEVELOPMENT"; stable is SuSE 10.1".
You should expect bugs with OpenSuSE 10.2.

In fact, for the month of October, there are 639 bug posts reported and it is only the 3rd day of the month.
There are a lot of folks all over the world hard at work trying to fix them. Yeah, they are all volunteers; that's what makes it great!

You should install OpenSuSE 10.2 on your system only to help provide feedback to help fix the problems; Not to run it as a production system.

The stable release of OpenSuSE 10.2 is scheduled for 5 December.

Have fun and report the bugs @ http://en.opensuse.org/Submitting_Bug_Reports.
The OpenSuSE 10.2 bug mailing list is @ http://lists.opensuse.org/archive/opensuse-bugs/.
[/b]

Yep I understand. I was referring to the final release of OpenSuSE 10.2, not the current alpha. Sorry for the harsh tone ealier on, but I was rather shocked to find out that the UP kernel would be dropped in 10.2.

As much as I wish to contribute, I'm quite new to the Linux world, having used Linux for like only 2 months now. Once I am more familiar and have more free time on hand, I hope to be able to do my part as well. In the meantime, I just hope OpenSuSE continues to be my OS of choice.

Oh yeah, I have managed to coax a number of M$-user friends to give OpenSuSE 10.2 a try when it is released. I can't wait for that day myself man.

Yep I understand. I was referring to the final release of OpenSuSE 10.2, not the current alpha. Sorry for the harsh tone ealier on, but I was rather shocked to find out that the UP kernel would be dropped in 10.2.

As much as I wish to contribute, I'm quite new to the Linux world, having used Linux for like only 2 months now. Once I am more familiar and have more free time on hand, I hope to be able to do my part as well. In the meantime, I just hope OpenSuSE continues to be my OS of choice.

Oh yeah, I have managed to coax a number of M$-user friends to give OpenSuSE 10.2 a try when it is released. I can't wait for that day myself man.
[/b]

Given that speed is such an issue for you, the first thing you should do is compile your own kernel and optimize it for your setup. This is true no matter what version of linux you are running.

Perhaps an i686 optimized distro like Arch would suit your needs better, bludhound.

Perhaps an i686 optimized distro like Arch would suit your needs better, bludhound.
[/b]

Thanks for the recommendation. I will try Arch one day.

I've tried compiling my own i686 2.6.18 kernel in Ubuntu. The startup time did DRASTICALLY decreased, but other than that nothing seemed to have gotten a performance increase. I've actually thought of compiling my own for SuSE but as I understand that the SuSE kernel is quite modified from the stock kernel, I'd rather not touch anything at least for now. I just hope to be lucky enough to pick up some cheap/free old computer to use as a testing ground for kernel compilations and trying out different distros.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I actually noticed that SuSE's kernel is quite optimized as compared to a stock kernel?