Stability and multitasking in Linux

[Haopengyou]

If I have some flavor of Linux installed on my pc and use it for multimedia functions, will the pc be more stable when rendering a DVD? I only have one pc and would like to still be able to use my pc for other things while the dvd is rendering. Windows XP does not provide for that. Yes, I know my pc is a little slow - p4 3.06 with 2 gb of memory - but I have to make do

[nonoitall]

I think the word you're looking for is responsive, not stable. Windows XP is perfectly capable of giving different priority to different tasks.

While your CPU-intensive task is running, type Ctrl+Alt+Del, click the Processes tab and locate the process that's taking up all the CPU, right-click it and Set Priority->BelowNormal.

[jagabo]

But be aware that some processes require (near) realtime CPU response. The actual burning of a DVD is one such process. Running other CPU intensive tasks while burning a DVD may result in a poor burn. You shouldn't lower that programs priority. (Burners now have "burn proof" technology that makes this less critical than it used to be.) But rendering the DVD MPEG 2 data does not require realtime response. Its priority can be set as low as you want.

Note that process priority effects scheduling. When more than one process wants to use the CPU the process with the higher priority well get the CPU more often. A process set at idle will only get the CPU when no other process wants it. But even a process running at idle priority will get all the CPU if no other program is running.

[disturbed1]

Follow the others' advice first to see if it cures what ails you.

The scheduler is the main reason I use Linux and not Windows. Windows does have a decent scheduler when running a couple of apps, Linux just happens have a much more robust one. New Windows Server editions have done some work on their CPU scheduler that is a marked improvement over previous Microsoft products, even more than the work that was done with Vista that trickled into 7. Linux also has better memory management.
All of these advancements that the Linux kernel has over the NT kernel mean nothing to the average user, frankly because they most likely don't have the hardware, nor the usage necessary to take advantage of it.

If you're interested in trying Linux out, I recommend one of the many Live CDs that will run without installation. Because it runs from CD, performance is ~50% of what an installed OS actually is. This lets you kick the tires so to speak.
Here a short list. Visit www.distrowatch.com for more
http://www.zenwalk.org/
http://www.elivecd.org/
http://software.opensuse.org/111/en
http://debian-live.alioth.debian.org/
http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora
http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html
http://www.slax.org/
http://www2.mandriva.com/downloads/?p=linux-one

[andie41]

I was perplexed as to why my x264 encodes were noticeably slower (approx 16%) in Ubuntu 64 compared to XP. XP uses all available cpu, Ubuntu Karmic, not so much (approx 75%); I found this explanation:

http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=185

[disturbed1]

in Ubuntu 64

cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
noop anticipatory [deadline] cfq

CFQ is not for performance desktop usage. Ubuntu attempts to be a jack of all trades. It's long been known that Ubuntu is not a performance Linux distro, but a best effort attempt at being an all around friendly re-packaged Debain. Ubuntu has a bad habit of incorrectly compiling multimedia libraries that hurt performance for many architectures. From optimizing strictly for Pentium 4 (which negates many optimizations for Core2/Core2Duo and AMD) to simply forgetting to build against NASM and YASM <--- these add the much needed assembler optimizations that give programs speed.
Hey Ubuntu, Stop Making Linux Look Bad
^ That article was written by Christopher Smart.

Too many times when I used to run Ubuntu (4.10 - 7.10), a simple rebuilding from source fixed the problems. I quit using Ubuntu because it got to the point where I was rebuilding 50% of the packages. Either to remove bad patches, fix incorrect options passed to configure, or because the package was initially built without a much desired linking library even though that library is part of the distribution.

This doesn't mean if you're looking for a better performing Desktop you need to Geek Out with Gentoo, there are plenty of other options that offer better performance, stability, and reliability. Debian, using the repos from http://debian-multimedia.org/ and www.rarewares.org adds all the multimedia packages Ubuntu has - and then some.

Ubuntu works quite well for many, and you should never fix what is not broken, but if you believe it's broken there are more than enough choices out there for you

This is one area where Windows decidedly excels for non Linux Geeks

[andie41]

interesting comments disturbed1, I have been thinking about trying a different distro for quite some time. Ubuntu is good for the basic internet, email, photo organizer, etc., but for audio/visual, it really is a work in progress; I always end up back in XP.

edit: as an example of Ubuntu frustrations, I recently tried mplayer, from your recommendation in an earlier post...tried playing a video and immediately received an error and mplayer closed. Recently tried to transfer video from my camera, looking for something simple like windv, finally installed Kino and after much searching and copying and pasting commands, it recognized my camera. As soon as I clicked capture... it crashed...so back to XP.

[disturbed1]

Give Debian a try. Debian is where Ubuntu gets it's base packages. The installation is not as easy as Ubuntu's live CD, but not overly difficult either. Debian offers 3 types of releases. Stable, Testing, and Unstable. Ubuntu syncs with Debian Unstable. Ubuntu's next release will (finally) sync with Debian Testing.
Debian Stable is exactly that - Stable! But, coming from Ubuntu, you'll think the packages are old. Debian Testing is considered by most more stable than an Ubuntu released version. Some packages may have a bug or crash, but nothing show stopping. If you want a proper distrobution based on Debian Sid (unstable) try Sidux.

If Slackware wasn't around I'd personally be using Debian

I don't want to take too much away from what Ubuntu has done, and is doing. Ubuntu is fabulous Linux distro for most people. It may even work flawlessly for many. The sad truth is that this is not always the case for everyone. And Linux != Ubuntu. You can get the same applications and features that Ubuntu offers in most other Linux distributions. Some will be horrendously worse than Ubuntu, others will be 100x better. It just depends on what your wants and needs are.

There's a distro that I believe was created by, or at least is endorsed by a forum member here. https://forum.videohelp.com/topic368300.html

[andie41]

one more comment/question - I don't mean to hijack this thread. The link I posted above Re x264 limitations in the current Linux kernel, would apply to all distros unless they are using 2.6.32...right? Are any distros using this kernel?

[lordsmurf]

I'd rather KVM multiple systems.
Recent explanation about KVMs: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/showthread.php/using-kvm-control-1615.html

Doing multiple things is best handled by having multiple computers.

[jagabo]

Doing multiple things is best handled by having multiple computers.

Some people don't have multiple money.

[disturbed1]

one more comment/question - I don't mean to hijack this thread. The link I posted above Re x264 limitations in the current Linux kernel, would apply to all distros unless they are using 2.6.32...right? Are any distros using this kernel?

Yes it would apply to all distros. Any and every distro can use which ever kernel you want. Do they have it built for you? No, .32 isn't out yet. There is a whole lot more to performance than switching schedulers. Kernel tuning is a dark science.

Doesn't mean every distro has the same settings in /proc/sys/kernel. The settings are tunable, it's the default settings of the Kernels' CFS, the link you posted talks about. Better defaults are always good Take a look at sched_compat_yield, sched_rt_period_us, sched_rt_runtime_us. Monitor with slabtop. /proc/sys/vm is another common tweak area. The kernel tuning is up to you the user to do, or have faith in your distro's resident Kernel hacker. Distro's usually error on the side of caution.

This is why some distro benchmark faster (Gentoo, Slackware, Debian) than other distros (Ubuntu, Mandriva, openSUSE). Notice that Ubuntu, Mandriva, and openSUSE are considered mainstream user friendly distros. Fedora flip - flops in performance from release to release. This is to be expected because of how much new and experimental code they create.

If you are looking for a somewhat easy to use, yet performance driven distro, try Arch Linux. It's a nice combo of having Gentoo capable options (ABS - arch buld system), a few Ubuntu-like user-friendly features, built on Slackware-like philosophy.

[Haopengyou]

Doing multiple things is best handled by having multiple computers.

Some people don't have multiple money.

Mega-dittos on that one! But in a year or so, when I have my pennies saved up, I will buy a new mb and set up, and keep my old one. The old one is still adequate for surfing, etc.

[16mmJunkie]

I'd rather KVM multiple systems.
Recent explanation about KVMs: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/showthread.php/using-kvm-control-1615.html

Doing multiple things is best handled by having multiple computers.

I agree, I also use KVM on multiple systems to complete projects. Also the advantage of running difference OS as well when running this method. If your just starting out I understand only having a single unit. But if your like me and been doing this type stuff for 14 plus years you have acquired many different systems. 8)


16mmJunkie


If the Light ain't Bright, It ain't Right!!