Idea
#59: Use more RAM memory (Yes really) !
|
| |
-365
|
|
|
Written by Agrou the 28 Feb 08 at 15:59.
Category: System.
Related to:
Nothing/Others.
Status: New
|
|
|
Description
Today most of the computers are providing 2Go of RAM or more. When I'm looking at the memory consumption of ubuntu it is about 400Mo.
I think that Ubuntu should look at the RAM capacity of the computer and take the full advantage of the hudge amount of memory that we have today.
I'm sure it will be possible to preload most usefull apps and to bring a more efficient, smooth and fast system.
Tags:
(none)
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
facundocorradini wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 16:23
|
That's already implemented. or so.
Ubuntu caches your aplications.
|
|
Agrou wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 16:33
| |
Maybe, but when I'm clicking at nautilus for exemple the hard drive is working. I don't think it is because it look at the default folder because it takes more than 1 second.
|
|
MakotoTheKnight wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 17:37
| |
I prefer the philosophy, "Linux uses what it needs, not what it wants". If I have 2GB of RAM, I want to see at least 80% of that belonging to the user, not the OS or anything fancy.
|
|
edcrypt wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 18:20
|
"Today most of the computers are providing 2Go of RAM or more."
Maybe in your hemisphere! :P
|
|
Spoker wrote on the 28 Feb 08 at 19:34
| |
Here I am, with 256 megs of ram!
|
|
bug-ubuntu wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 00:15
|
I see a big advantage in using the ram for caching the most frequently needed things. I did not buy ram for having it empty most of the time.
Of course this should not prevent the user of having access to it if his applications do need it (Makoto), and of course it should not change behaviour for machins with smaller ram!
|
|
dburanen wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 01:53
| |
Look at gnome-system-monitor and you'll see that most of your ram is cached.
|
|
Estesark wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 02:51
|
I think this idea will forever be the idea with the greatest negative score on the whole of brainstorm. Congratulations.
Remember that Ubuntu is meant to be inclusive and available. Increasing the system requirements would go against that.
|
|
zeb wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 03:00
|
I had to vote this down because it's Microsoft thinking. Linux is loved the world round because of it's frugal nature which simultaneously yields great power when needed.
Waste not want not.
|
|
TheBurgerKing wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 06:15
| |
Dont encourage OS bloat why do you think vista is what it is. It was built by a company that doesn't care for efficiency
|
|
maltes wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 12:36
|
AFAIK the kernel itself is already doing exactly what you are asking for.
It caches stuff it thinks you will need all the time. Hence system memory is allways almost full. This is not a performance issue, since it doesn't take more time to overwrite stuff than it takes to write stuff to blank memory.
|
|
bntuuu wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 17:26
|
Less is more.
In fact, I was about to post a recommendation that a lighter install be possible for people with 128Mb or less.
Keep in mind that a big draw for Linux is the ability to salvage old systems.
I believe many people would be happy with an install which has a minimalist install of a web browser WITH flash out of the box(I perfer Firefox), email client, and maybe an office app.
While I enjoy the enhancements, 95% of what I do is surf the web and check my mail.
|
|
Agrou wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 23:16
|
I agree with you when you (all) said that ubuntu and linux in general must work with small systems. I do have an old computer with 256Mb running with ubuntu and it is a very good thing to be able to do that. Vista is really NOT the example, but if there is more memory avaliable why not using that ? This is a simple question.
I know that linux is already caching a lot of things but maybe it is possible to do more on that way ONLY WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE, if there is a lot of memory available. It is about using capacity of computers not increase the system requirements.
But maybe I'm the only person thinking that my(yours ?) favorites apps should start/run faster ? Or did I explain it in a wrong way ( english is not my native language )?
|
|
MakotoTheKnight wrote on the 1 Mar 08 at 01:38
|
Well then, you're really not talking about the memory (since it can only hold the information), you'd be talking about the processor. That's where it'll make things a ton faster.
Memory can hold the programs. Processors actually make them run.
Also, I do a lot of high-strung and CPU-intensive tasks on a daily basis (programming and compiling), so I obviously want as little demand on the CPU as I can get, and as little of that kernel occupying the RAM as I can get.
|
|
herorev wrote on the 2 Mar 08 at 04:30
| |
Wow, this is the very first time I've ever seen, in the wild, units like "Mo" (megaoctet) and "Go" (gigaoctet). But wouldn't units like Mio (mebioctet) and Gio (gibioctet) be more appropriate here?
|
|
leszek wrote on the 3 Mar 08 at 21:10
|
"I'm sure it will be possible to preload most usefull apps and to bring a more efficient, smooth and fast system. "
In fact, it already exists and it is called .... "preload"
It is an application which register the most used files and preload them in the ram at the next boot.
|
|
Endolith wrote on the 15 Apr 08 at 19:18
| |
So you all want us to leave RAM sitting there unused to enable the computer to run... slower? That doesn't make sense. If it's there, use it. Anything to make the computer run faster and more efficiently, on any system.
|
|
brunovecchi wrote on the 29 Apr 08 at 03:07
|
I'm surprised. This is actually a good idea with an unfortunate title (jugding by the undeserved number of downvotes). Taking advantage of the actual RAM capacity is not detrimental to efficiency. on the contrary, it would make the system much faster.
I agree though, that it should raise the minimum RAM required to run the OS, just make use of how much memory it is given to it.
|
|
andersja wrote on the 15 May 08 at 15:51
| |
+1 - this is actually quite an interesting idea...! Improved caching etc should not increase the load of low spec computers but should allow high-spec computers to improve user experience!
|
|
Endolith wrote on the 27 May 08 at 15:55
|
@herorev
gigaoctet is French. Agrou is French, so he will probably use the French unit. :) Yes, RAM would be "2 Gio". Most other things are just Go.
|
|
polishubuntu wrote on the 25 Jun 08 at 13:15
| |
The more RAM something uses the slower it gets
|
|
brunovecchi wrote on the 7 Aug 08 at 03:52
|
@ polishubuntu:
wrong. The system only gets slow if it goes out of ram and starts swapping with hard disk memory.
|
Post your comment
|
|
|
