Linux General Questions

It's nice to do at least once to learn Linux better. But yeah, I'm with DanB, ain't nobody got time for that on a regular basis....

DanB wrote:
Malor wrote:

I actually find installing it kind of fun, but sans the 90s nostalgia rush, I don't think most people would care for the process overmuch.

While I do see the attraction there just came a point where I was sick of having to spend multiple hours of my free time sys admining my home computer(s). These days I only do admin-y and ops stuff at work where I'm being paid for my time and my home set is just dumb operating systems that, in the main, just work (win10, OSX).

Yep. I switched to Mac about 9 years ago and never looked back. I'm dreading when my MacBook Pro dies. Once that dies I'll be torn between their current awful hardware (touchbar, keys without travel) and becoming a sys admin in my own home again.

DanB wrote:
Malor wrote:

I actually find installing it kind of fun, but sans the 90s nostalgia rush, I don't think most people would care for the process overmuch.

While I do see the attraction there just came a point where I was sick of having to spend multiple hours of my free time sys admining my home computer(s). These days I only do admin-y and ops stuff at work where I'm being paid for my time and my home set is just dumb operating systems that, in the main, just work (win10, OSX).

Yeah, it's a niche version of an OS that's a niche product to begin with. It's not a good choice for most people. But if you're strong technically, and you want to see the most current GPL software running at close to its best possible configuration, Arch is frequently the place to look.

If you don't want to tinker, stay way far away from it. Ubuntu and its various spins are usually pretty low-maintenance, although they've lost a lot of polish since the 2010 version that I liked so much. Technically, it's generally much less impressive, but it's a heck of a lot easier to run.

On the drive problem: the reason to use an I/O scheduler is to try to minimize head seek time. All these algorithms are based around the fact that a physical read/write head can only be in one place, and takes a long time to move across the drive. (milliseconds, which is ages in computer time.) This is a version of the elevator problem; how do you move from floor to floor in a way that moves the most possible passengers?

SSDs don't have read heads, and thus don't have that problem. Reading or writing anywhere on the disk takes about the same amount of time, and isn't really impacted by prior I/O. Setting their scheduler to "none" will usually give you excellent performance. The SSD itself should be smart enough to do write-combining, so just passing through the read/write requests verbatim, as they come in, will normally give outstanding results.

If you're seeing sluggishness of that magnitude, that sounds like your writes are happening in a very slow mode, like maybe the drive's getting set to ancient PIO mode via IDE emulation.

Are the SSDs set to AHCI mode in the BIOS?