digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at news.softpedia.com

Ubuntu 9.04 Boots in 21.4 Seconds

news.softpedia.com — Ok how will the end user benefit from this EXT4 filesystem? Well, first of all, the whole system will be much faster and more reliable compared to one with EXT3, it will boot faster (the current article proves that) and it's able to handle files with sizes of up to 16 terabytes (1 TB = 1000 GB).

Who dugg this? Made popular Jan 14, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

349 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • spritom, on 01/13/2009, -28/+295Wow! That's 16 minutes and 38.6 seconds faster than my XP machine at work!
  • inactive, on 01/14/2009, -6/+1251 TB = 1024 GB.
  • skyshock1, on 01/14/2009, -12/+110But... my Ubuntu box already gets to init3 in 13 seconds.

    And then again, WHO GIVES A ***** ABOUT BOOT TIME when you're using Linux? I NEVER boot my machine unless there's a new kernel worth upgrading to.
  • inactive, on 01/14/2009, -1/+87Laptops.
  • awolfe91, on 01/14/2009, -2/+81Stop visiting that midget porn site...well there's your problem!
  • mrtubby, on 01/14/2009, -4/+77I'm going to assume the Ubuntu box boots more more than the kernel and a shell.
  • BluSkreenOfDeth, on 01/13/2009, -3/+62I wonder how EXT4 compares with the ZFS file system that is being developed?
  • inactive, on 01/14/2009, -23/+7621 seconds ? Damn, that's twice as slow as my Gentoo box :)
  • kentifer, on 01/14/2009, -1/+48Whenever I turn my computer on, I just walk away and do something else for a minute, then return.
  • Deveak, on 01/14/2009, -15/+62wtf is wrong with your computer? Mine boots in 45 seconds.
  • coldkill3r, on 01/14/2009, -2/+46300mhz processor?
  • zyklon, on 01/14/2009, -4/+46Thanks, Softpedia, for the explanation of how big a terabyte is. I wasn't sure.

    /s

    But seriously, I think that anyone who's dealing with Ubuntu knows very well what is what when it comes to memory...
  • mrsteveman1, on 01/14/2009, -1/+40ZFS itself is designed to replace hardware raid and softraid in addition to being a filesystem, EXT4 is just a filesystem.
  • WafflesID, on 01/14/2009, -3/+36They prefer little-people-porn dammit. insensitive bastard.
  • solarwind24, on 01/14/2009, -0/+30I think it's to avoid the confusion between 1000 and 1024.
  • 4321234, on 01/14/2009, -0/+30From a cold start?
  • inactive, on 01/14/2009, -1/+30Corporate Windows machines never get cleaned out, serviced or re-installed every 6 months or so. Most are still the original XP installed in 2001. As you know Windows is a Digital Garbage dump and anything and everything is usually given a Key. When it boots it has to load everything, dump non existing RAM calls for existing ones and so on.
  • bullsfan03, on 01/14/2009, -4/+33It takes me less than 21.4 seconds to masturbate
  • Barackalypse, on 01/14/2009, -1/+26My Windows Vista 64 Ultimate MainPathBootTime is 56 seconds (basically from the time Windows starts booting until you have a usable desktop, mine continues to load non-critical drivers and processes for another 49 seconds or so once I get mouse control). For those curious, Vista's Event Viewer contains this performance related information, here's how to access it:
    http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=246&tag=nl.e622
  • Memnochxx, on 01/14/2009, -0/+24How many people do you think reading about linux and ext4 don't know how much a tb is?
  • PleaseJustDie, on 01/14/2009, -1/+24My xp machine at work is the same, I have a bunch of .net development tools on it and when I got to sql server 2008 express my computer's boot time is now insanely long.

    I swing by a fast food place on the way in and grab breakfast then when I get to work hit the power button and eat while I wait.
  • fuckingusername, on 01/14/2009, -10/+32linux is really developing fast. Time for a triple boot again lol
  • nestcrw, on 01/14/2009, -0/+21Sit back and relax, I've got it for you.

    http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=ubuntu
  • chicken101, on 01/14/2009, -1/+22Base 2 or base 10, that is the question.
  • AngryBacon, on 01/14/2009, -1/+22S3 standby all the way.
  • wildfire, on 01/14/2009, -4/+25Not in the storage industry.*

    *"One gigabyte (GB) = one billion bytes. One terabyte (TB) = one trillion bytes. Total accessible capacity varies depending on operating environment."

  • TheBuzzKiller, on 01/14/2009, -1/+21What? 30,000 apps all available at the click of button, including piles of dev tools, office applications, web browsers, multimedia viewing/editing, 3d/graphic design, yada yada. If you can't find useful applications in the Ubuntu repository, I think you need to look up the definition of "useful".
  • TheKorn2, on 01/14/2009, -6/+25Let's see... compare an amd sempron running the old stuff to a core2duo running the new stuff... wow, no sh*t, ten seconds difference!

    What a GARBAGE article. The most relevent number was the sempron running ext3 vs the sempron running ext4. Whaddya know, only five seconds difference. Noticable, but not the big tomatoes the article headline promises.
  • filefly, on 01/14/2009, -1/+20Um, irrelevant?
  • peters1023, on 01/14/2009, -2/+20P2?
  • audiored, on 01/14/2009, -4/+21I'm getting excited about 9.04...
  • inactive, on 01/14/2009, -0/+17You know that's not true. Video or it didn't happen.
  • quomen, on 01/14/2009, -2/+18Are we making popcorn?
  • inactive, on 01/14/2009, -3/+19Unfortunately, I've had some major problems with standby when using Nvidia's graphics driver, on both Vista and Ubuntu.
  • Kingoftherings, on 01/14/2009, -4/+20Tell us what your boot time is in six months.
  • grayiscolorful, on 01/14/2009, -2/+17*slaps forehead after reading an explanation of a terabyte for a linux filesystem article*
  • MrNonchalant, on 01/14/2009, -0/+15But only because he spent a year configuring and emerging.
  • maximatron, on 01/14/2009, -0/+14dugg for random vulgarity
  • K4Lic0, on 01/14/2009, -2/+16My mom's 6 year old Dell laptop is set up to dual boot XP and Ubuntu. Ubuntu is ridiculously fast comparatively.
  • Professr, on 01/14/2009, -0/+13I'm strangely okay with it...
  • fwertz, on 01/14/2009, -17/+29Boot times, ill-relevant.
  • pukiman, on 01/14/2009, -0/+12Video, or it didn't happen.
  • spritom, on 01/14/2009, -1/+13Ack! Don't tell me that! Desktop tech told me that they'll upgrade my Visual Studio from 05 to 08 to fix some of the performance issues.

    Then again, how many times did upgrading a Microsoft product ever speed things up because it was lighter and more efficient?
  • Viperidae, on 01/14/2009, -1/+13is it even an os at all? Yes
    what is it? It is a Linux based operating system
    how does it work? Similar to how other operating systems work
    what makes it better than the major os's (if it is an os)? Its free, secure and much less prone to spyware/viruses
    will it run my regular programs? Most of them yes
    like photoshop, aim, illustrator, etc etc??? Photoshop yes, Aim yes, Illustrator yes.
    how can i get it? Download it from their website
    how do i install it? Burn the file onto a blank disc and follow the instructions.
  • grungegbunny, on 01/14/2009, -0/+12I am so looking forward to April.
  • elithrar, on 01/14/2009, -1/+12Just to clarify: ZFS won't feature in Linux as it's not GPL.
  • DemDude, on 01/14/2009, -0/+11People with dual- or triple-boot machines?

    I'm currently running Vista, Win7 and Ubuntu - Boot times are important.
  • se7envii, on 01/14/2009, -1/+12Wow awesome. This works in Windows 7 too. My MainPathBootTime was ~19 seconds to get to a usable desktop and around another ~17 seconds to load the rest.

    Edit: Here's a copy/paste of my results:

    BootStartTime 2009-01-14T02:55:47.687200300Z
    BootEndTime 2009-01-14T02:57:49.113370300Z
    SystemBootInstance 12
    UserBootInstance 10
    BootTime 37862
    MainPathBootTime 19162
    BootKernelInitTime 21
    BootDriverInitTime 3483
    BootDevicesInitTime 3303
  • PleaseJustDie, on 01/14/2009, -1/+11I use mysql, however I'm a developer, if the client wants mssql or has an existing mssql server I develop for mssql. And mysql and mssql are different enough that I can't develop for one and expect it to work on the other.

    Especially if you're using stored procedures and things like LIMIT and FOUND_ROWS. Great on mysql for pagination but to achieve the same effect on mssql you have to do it completely differently.

    Also, you don't need linux for mysql, it will install and run just fine in windows.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 357 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.