maemo.org - Talk
Page 13 of 68 « First 31112 13 141523 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)
-   SailfishOS (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=52)
-   -   First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0 (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=95923)

pichlo 2015-09-08 22:47
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by catbus (Post 1481672)
More memory and no swap? ;)
An excellent suggestion.

One last question: how exactly do you suggest to achieve that on my Jolla? ;)

(Actually, my main PC up to September 2013 had 1GB RAM and no swap and it never ran out of memory, despite habitually running some quite heavy applications. Just the antivirus alone took about 30%. That a mobile phone with the same amount of RAM cannot manage even three running apps is a scandal that screams "incompetence" loudly and clearly for the whole world to hear.)

bluefoot 2015-09-08 23:48
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
A lot of people in this thread are acting like big OOM & resource issues and the handling of them, poor performance and unreliability are something new to them or new to this update. i can only assume they've either not used sailfish much or at all prior to (pre)2.0 or were hoping that it would be some kind of magic bullet ... or was the already chronic situation really made that much worse? i've yet to try it as i'm away and 'hacking' the update is the last thing i want to do. but for those who have tried it and already took a dim view of the status quo, what's the state of play with 1.1.9 ... could it really be worse in those respects, or were people just being very naive about what 2.0 might bring. Tbh I'm done with Sailfish if resource handling gets worse ... it's almost intolerable as it is.

wormdrummer 2015-09-09 02:51
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Are their any improvements to the email client as part of the new release?

Bundyo 2015-09-09 03:32
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pichlo (Post 1481675)
An excellent suggestion.

One last question: how exactly do you suggest to achieve that on my Jolla? ;)

(Actually, my main PC up to September 2013 had 1GB RAM and no swap and it never ran out of memory, despite habitually running some quite heavy applications. Just the antivirus alone took about 30%. That a mobile phone with the same amount of RAM cannot manage even three running apps is a scandal that screams "incompetence" loudly and clearly for the whole world to hear.)
Big chunk of that RAM is taken by the Android support. Killing it gives you 50% free, which is okay for a number of concurrent tasks. :)

As for the 1GB RAM PC - do you run a browser in it? It will swallow your RAM in one go, especially Chrome :)

TemeV 2015-09-09 06:05
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluefoot (Post 1481680)
A lot of people in this thread are acting like big OOM & resource issues and the handling of them, poor performance and unreliability are something new to them or new to this update. i can only assume they've either not used sailfish much or at all prior to (pre)2.0 or were hoping that it would be some kind of magic bullet ... or was the already chronic situation really made that much worse? i've yet to try it as i'm away and 'hacking' the update is the last thing i want to do. but for those who have tried it and already took a dim view of the status quo, what's the state of play with 1.1.9 ... could it really be worse in those respects, or were people just being very naive about what 2.0 might bring. Tbh I'm done with Sailfish if resource handling gets worse ... it's almost intolerable as it is.
I guess this whole discussion is my fault, because i was giving (false) hope of improvements to the situation. Sorry about that. (I didn't notice that an app might be killed even if the cover stays there. I sent my phone to warranty service already so I can't verify the situation).

So I guess nothing has changed, neither worse nor better.

ste-phan 2015-09-09 07:30
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by juiceme (Post 1481637)
Forget about swap on flash media, whether it be on raw disk partition or on top of filesystem...
Swap on flash is a BAD IDEA and it WILL kill your flash.
Probably but how soon?
Since I have stopped overclocking I am now trying to kill my SD with swapping.
I am a happy user of the flopswap script to alternate between two swap partitions on N900. :p

MartinK 2015-09-09 07:39
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluefoot (Post 1481680)
A lot of people in this thread are acting like big OOM & resource issues and the handling of them, poor performance and unreliability are something new to them or new to this update. i can only assume they've either not used sailfish much or at all prior to (pre)2.0 or were hoping that it would be some kind of magic bullet ...
I think this is because many people had the N9, which had the same amount of RAM but managed to fluently multitask much better and without killing apps left and right (IIRC you had to try quite hard to make it kill an app due to memory exhaustion).

So people are asking why the Jolla can't manage as much with similar amount of resources, considering that the OS and apps themselves provide similar functionality to Harmattan and it's apps. Well, or quite often actually less functionality (Tweatian is for example still unfortunately nowhere near to what QNeptunia managed back then, no comparable event screen, no SIP calling,...). And of course Harmattan managed to do all that on a Maemo 5-6 based franken-OS with X handling the GUI!

So people kinda expect that a new distro with faster CPU and cutting edge components (newer kernel, systemd, Wayland!) should manage at least as much as Harmattan on the N9...

BTW, anyone can provide any insights how Harmattan managed to cope with the 1 GB of RAM ? I know it already used an early version of ZRAM and did some crazy things with OpenGL context reuse to reduce memory consumption, but would be interested to know if there was more stuff like this. :)

bluefoot 2015-09-09 08:23
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
@MartinK ... I know, but a lot of people were previously ignoring the elephant in the room or, preposterously, claiming that Sailfish was fast, lightweight, optimised and reliable. I was wondering what caused the sudden reality check.

The true believers are either absent or conspicuously quiet for once. Usually the fair knights of the community rush to defend the honour of the damsel in distress (Jolla/Sailfish) .... that isn't really happening this time. People are arguing about the details, but not denying the problem or its magnitude. I just find it strange, as Sailfish has been woeful in the previously stated regards either since its inception or since the Qt update for the OOM (10 months ago).

pichlo 2015-09-09 08:52
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bundyo (Post 1481690)
Big chunk of that RAM is taken by the Android support. Killing it gives you 50% free, which is okay for a number of concurrent tasks. :)
That commonly repeated excuse may apply in most people's cases but not in mine. My Jolla has never been tarnished with Android and will never be, if I can help it.

Quote:
As for the 1GB RAM PC - do you run a browser in it? It will swallow your RAM in one go, especially Chrome :)
Chrome is a Google product and as such I would never touch it with a barge pole but yes, of course I regularly used a browser - Firefox in my case - with more than three tabs open without FF ever having to reload any of them when I switched between them. I am not a big fan of keeping hundreds of tabs but if a browser cannot keep 5-6 open at the same time then something is terribly wrong.

Look, instead of speculations, how about some hard numbers.
Here are two 'free' reports.

Code:
---
| SailfishOS 1.1.7.28 (Björnträsket) (armv7hl)
'---
[nemo@Dinghy ~]$ free
            total      used      free    shared    buffers    cached
Mem:        825664    725376    100288      0      6516      200052
-/+ buffers/cache:    518808    306856
Swap:      627516    102652    524864
[nemo@Dinghy ~]$ free
            total      used      free    shared    buffers    cached
Mem:        825664    570696    254968      0      6516      200416
-/+ buffers/cache:    363764    461900
Swap:      627516    102652    524864
[nemo@Dinghy ~]$
In both cases, Terminal and some background processes were running, including the Meecast, Call Recorder and SysMon daemons. In the first case, Browser was running as well with one tab open showing this thread. That may account for the 150 MB difference but how on earth do you account for the 570 MB base?

Just think about it. The bare OS plus a couple of measly daemons consume 570 out of 825 MB RAM! That's 69%. For just the OS! With no applications running. On my PC, the bare OS, when I disabled the anti-virus, took less than 140 MB, or about 14%.

And this is supposed to be on a mobile device, one that the developers knew it was going to run with limited resources. My PC was a 9 years old laptop, running a modern, unoptimised OS designed for quadcore machines with 8 times as much memory as I was able to provide. How is this even possible?

ste-phan 2015-09-09 10:30
Re: First thoughts about the (pre) Sailfish OS 2.0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pichlo (Post 1481728)
That commonly repeated excuse may apply in most people's cases but not in mine. My Jolla has never been tarnished with Android and will never be, if I can help it.



Chrome is a Google product and as such I would never touch it with a barge pole but yes, of course I regularly used a browser - Firefox in my case - with more than three tabs open without FF ever having to reload any of them when I switched between them. I am not a big fan of keeping hundreds of tabs but if a browser cannot keep 5-6 open at the same time then something is terribly wrong.

Look, instead of speculations, how about some hard numbers.
Here are two 'free' reports.

Code:
---
| SailfishOS 1.1.7.28 (Björnträsket) (armv7hl)
'---
[nemo@Dinghy ~]$ free
            total      used      free    shared    buffers    cached
Mem:        825664    725376    100288      0      6516      200052
-/+ buffers/cache:    518808    306856
Swap:      627516    102652    524864
[nemo@Dinghy ~]$ free
            total      used      free    shared    buffers    cached
Mem:        825664    570696    254968      0      6516      200416
-/+ buffers/cache:    363764    461900
Swap:      627516    102652    524864
[nemo@Dinghy ~]$
In both cases, Terminal and some background processes were running, including the Meecast, Call Recorder and SysMon daemons. In the first case, Browser was running as well with one tab open showing this thread. That may account for the 150 MB difference but how on earth do you account for the 570 MB base?

Just think about it. The bare OS plus a couple of measly daemons consume 570 out of 825 MB RAM! That's 69%. For just the OS! With no applications running. On my PC, the bare OS, when I disabled the anti-virus, took less than 140 MB, or about 14%.

And this is supposed to be on a mobile device, one that the developers knew it was going to run with limited resources. My PC was a 9 years old laptop, running a modern, unoptimised OS designed for quadcore machines with 8 times as much memory as I was able to provide. How is this even possible?

I am not an expert, but I have learned that OS systems take memory like for disc caching or some prefetching task when it is available (as opposed to let it just rest and look cool). So I'd be surprised if all of that 570 MB would go to vital base OS tasks.

In the free command above the amount of memory available for your applications is -/+ buffers/cache and still ~461 MB and ~306 MB respectively.
That should be more than enough available memory to smart Sailfish programmers? :)

On the other hand the Android VM has only 512MB installed, I suppose that is a disaster in terms of modern Android RAM expectations. Users will have to cherry pick their Android apps to avoid out of memory situations.
The sooner Android users need 3GB and want 6GB , the better for Samsung, so they can start selling flagship phones again.

http://global.samsungtomorrow.com/sa...b-lpddr4-dram/


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:05.
Page 13 of 68 « First 31112 13 141523 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8