Slashdot Mirror
Linux Tuning Repository
Owain Vaughan writes "Mindcraft's excuse for their results when comparing highly tuned
NT versus vanilla Linux was that there was no
central source of Linux Tuning information.
Well there is now.
Please submit all the Linux tuning articles you can get
hold of to root@vaughan.com"
I am personally building an Enterprise (meta?) Howto ( here), and I'm working with some guys on a knowledge base and other documenation.
It would be nice if someone could put together a page on documentation projects currently in progress/infancy - mail me at betty@area51.upsu.plym.ac.uk with any info on projects or if you want info on projects - if I don't hear anything I'll put together my own documentation/Knowledgebase in progress page at the above address.
Laters.. Aaron (TheJackal/TJ)- where's my cookie gone?
There are some OS tuning resources in the "Optimization and Tuning of the OS" section of Sys.Admin. page of Gary's Encyclopedia".
http://www.nl.linux.org/linuxperf/
this is an awesome site for linux tips
check it out
http://portico.org
-xyster
Posted by Uncle Humph:
G uide/ for example.
http://www.antarctic.penguincomputing.com/Linux
Rik van Riel has already started a linux tuning site over at nl.linux.org. Already there are some 50+ folks on the alias with documents starting to fly around the CVS system. Nobody has mentioned this site to us, so what's the deal?
Life is complete only for brief intervals in between toys or projects -- John Dalton
For those of you who can't resolve the domain name yet or something, www.tunelinux.com is 193.243.238.236.
-mike kania
The alpha architecture seems to be conspicuous by it's absence!
Too bad, because tuning stuff (compiler flags etc) gets you lots of gains on these machines, and it's really picky about the types of memory accesses etc.
Well, yes, that is the first and foremost danger, probably. I've experienced this myself, once accidentally deleting my main .netscape folder when I thought I was in a different directory (or something, it was late at night.)
Besides this, if you are using root for your day-to-day work, you might run a binary or script that would be a big no-no to run as root. Like some malicious trojan horse code. While there is always a slight danger installing any software that you haven't thoroughly reviewed, this danger is lessened when the software is only run with the priveleges of a normal user.
If you are running a strictly single-user system and are not connected to a network, you could probably "get away with" logging in as root all the time. But there is no real reason to do this, just create a damn user! Unix security will protect you from your own late-night ineptitude!
This should be part of a TUNING-HOWTO and put in the LDP. The LDP could also do with some organization too. Something like microsoft technet or support.apple.com would be nice.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
Why not just contribute tuning info to the LDP?
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
If only slashdot would be *selective* about what they post. Merely getting posted as a main article on slashdot will cause something to be hyped , and slashdot should make sure that they aren't unfairly hyping vapourware over a project that is more mature , productive and deserving of publicity.
TCP Tuning information for many operating systems (including Linux, BSD, and Microsoft's offerings) may be found at the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center and NLANR Engineering Services
I'm not worried about the security implications of telling people about the root account. I'm well aware of the fact that virtually every Unix box has one. What worries me most is the impression it gives to the world to tell people to email you at root instead of a regular account. In my experience, everybody who knows anything at all about system administration tries to minimize their use of the root account. Conversely, the people who use "root" as their primary account instead of creating a non-privledged account are almost by definition inexperienced and/or lazy.
;-)>
I think it's a great idea for the Linux community to have a resource for tuning information. However, if you want that resource to be taken seriously the people running it at least need to look like they know what they are doing.
I don't buy the alias theory. Someone who has managed to get root's mail aliased to some other account also knows that it takes abount 10 seconds to create an arbitrary alias to use for situations like this. Of course, this is all a mooot point since the web page now gives a nice clean alias to use for submitting tips.
Seems like a bad idea to me too. Aside from the numerous security risks that come from using root as a regular account, it implies that the person running this machine is too lazy to even bother creating a non-super account. Or too ignorant to know any better. Either way, it presents a really bad image.
(lets try this again since I can't type today and keep smacking the wrong keys)
Note : I use "we" as a general pronoun here
What are we really accomplishing by having all these "helper" sites come online - especially when they have little or no content to them?
Wouldn't it make more sense (and maybe this is being done, but it needs to be publicized (sp) a bit better) to have all these ppl who are creating these sites pool their efforts and work on one big site?
Their intentions are definately good - but it's not acheiving the desired goal.
I know if I was a newbie user, I'd want to be able to look one place for all the hints, docs, etc that I needed, rather then having to visit numerous sites to find out one thing.
That's why sunsite was so great - b/c you could find a lot of what you were looking for in one place. But - it's not like that any more (at least I think)
We're trying to pursuade people to move over to linux as their OS of choice - but how easy are we making it for them with these "helper" sites that come on-line, but have no "help" in them.
I think that if everyone invested their time into one unified project, we'd have one helluva documentation/hints site on our hands.
Find a group of people to administer it, find a group to write the scripts (I'd help w/ that part myself), find people for "formalize" all the hints and documents that are submitted, and then put them online.
We're moving forward w/ providing documentation, but we're moving backwards as well.
Note : Again - remember that I use "we" as a general pronoun, and it doesn't necessarily refer to people who read this site - it's more of a linux population as a whole
-Jae
The following is quoted from the Merriam Webster Online Dictionary
By the way: I think you mean, "definitely." Not "definately."tunelinux seems a bit sparse on content. It seems more like a template for a new site, than a ready to launch site. The links I followed all seemed to point to simple descriptions of the various daemons and architectures. They could have seeded it with at least the Apache Performance notes or the more specific OS performance notes already published on the main Apache site. Not to mention the fact that they could have perused the contents of the many howtos listed at Linuxberg among many other places. It looks like a good starting point though, and I'm sure it will become a useful resource once more content is provided. It is a nice design, but "Content is King."
Technet, or
Microsoft's Knowledge Base, or
www.microsoft.com...
I find it laughable that a bunch of geeks can't find technical information for the most widely disseminated OS in the world. The answers aren't easy to find, but they are centrally located, and everything there is (theoretically) authoritative. And if you can't find the answer from Microsoft, you won't find an answer. Every answer I've ever gotten from a non-Microsoft source has turned out to be either a dumbed down version of Microsoft's info or plain wrong.
P.S. I don't claim to be a fan of MS, but I did support their products for about three years.
Let a guy who has some KNOWLEDGE about tuning put up a site not just a guy who can put up a webpage
I would suggest that if someone is going to design a free unix kernel, it should be someone with a a master's in comp sci and at least ten years' experience programming operating systems in C with a major American corporation. It should certainly NOT be a Finnish student whose main experience with Unix was using it or writing programs for it.
This is not a corporation where you can assign jobs to people, ordemand that someone with qualifications X, Y, and Z be found to do the job. Instead, the work gets done by whoever chooses to do the job. I don't see any experts coming forward to maintain a repository of all Linux tuning information, or even a clearinghouse of where it can be found. The people who can do a better job are probably not that interested in being librarians, as they are busy being programmers.
I've always had a rule that I think is applicable here: feel free to criticize someone else's work if you can demonstrate the ability to do a better job.
I think Eric Raymond made a point in at least one of those two papers (Cathedral and Bazaar and Homesteading the Noosphere) that open source projects don't tend to succeed unless they start from a functional project. (Mozilla is a good example of this; it has required a lot more effort to get off the ground because there was not a functional product to start with) So I don't think "misunderstanding" is not the problem, more like "ignoring" - like, this part sounds cool, but this part sounds like work, so forget about it.
:)
On the other hand, what do you consider a working product for a web site? The site in question has doubtless gleaned some useful information from this discussion, and if he has half a brain will spend the next day or so tracking info down and updating his page.
On the other hand, unless he's really dedicated, it's liable to peter out after a month or so. This kind of project requires hard work for a long time to be successful.
On the other hand - by now I'm a quadruped - thats all I wanted to say
I am dissapointed that this site is Live and yet doesn't contain any useful information what so ever.
By publicizing this site in this way, the author is accumulating quite a few pointers to useful information. The author demonstrates some level of commitment and credibility by investing time and $$$ to create this site (though admittedly not a WHOLE lot).
How is this going to co-ordinate itself with the kernel-doc effort being placed by riel@humbolt.nl.linux.org?
Ask the site maintainer - how is anyone else supposed to know the answer to this question? Oh wait - you didn't mean to be helpful, did you? You just wanted to criticize.
Mindcraft/Microsoft will be laughing at this site. And it will fuel their FUD that everything under Linux is Alpha/Beta software in the public domain.
What this author is proposing will not spring into view fully formed. It will take a lot of work and effort by a lot of people because no one has all the answers. The author clearly felt that the best way to grow his site was to go public as soon as he could. With a lot of work and a little luck, it will grow up.
I think it should be taken off until the author knows at least some links to Kernel tuning sites - the author could at least put up some "Under Construction" signs...
Once again, you demonstrate your desire not to help but to criticize. What are those links? Do you know where such information is? Why aren't you sharing it? The site's author is trying to be helpful; I see no evidence of that from you.
I, too, was disappointed at the lack of information on this site, but I could see that it was a work in progress. It takes a real jackass to say that because something isn't finished it isn't worth spending time on.
Well, it is about time. I get a lot of information from the Linux How-Tos, but we do need to get more central repositories for Linux knowledge. Looks like the site may have been /.ed, but it may be the proxy server here. Will it contain info for individual users as well as sysadmins?
Logic ... merely enables one to be wrong with authority. -- Doctor Who
I am dissapointed that this site is Live and yet doesn't contain any useful information what so ever.
How is this going to co-ordinate itself with the kernel-doc effort being placed by riel@humbolt.nl.linux.org ?
Mindcraft/Microsoft will be laughing at this site. And it will fuel their FUD that everything under Linux is Alpha/Beta software in the public domain.
I think it should be taken off until the author knows at least some links to Kernel tuning sites - the author could at least put up some "Under Construction" signs...
At least the www.nl.linux.org/linuxperf site states that it is still under construction.
:)
After 5 seconds consideration I'm come to the conclusion that www.linuxtuning.com is slow and unprofessional.
www.nl.linux.org/linuxperf has to my knowledge 50 volunteers and has been properly consulted through the Linux mailing lists - which seems the right way to get people who know what they are talking about involved.
There has been a delay with linuxperf because they didn't expect to get so many volunteers and what seemed to be a small project at first looks as if it will require more management than earlier envisaged. Thankfully, however, this will probably make for a higher quality and more complete documentation project over the long term.
Thanks for listening.
looking up www.tunelinux.com
Official name: www.tunelinux.com
IP address: 193.243.238.236
It seems to resolve now, but it didn't the first time I tried it
Maybe he's really using NT and has an account called root!!!!
Steven Rostedt
-- Nevermind