On Monday 17 June 2019 12:10:55 am BorgLabs - Kate Draven wrote:
On 06/13/2019 02:56 AM, BorgLabs - Kate Draven wrote:
HI =20 I would like everyone's opinion on this. =20 I'm trying figure out the benefits of either staying with the LTS kerne=
l or=20
with the lastest kernel. The machines are every day use and stability i=
s=20
important.=20 =20 Am I tossing away any benefits, of the latest kernel, if I use the 4.8x=
/9x=20
kernel. Or do the benefits of the 5.1x kernel out weigh any instability=
?=20
=20 I'd like all schools of thought. =20 Thanks in advance, =20 Kate
Kate,
Unless you have super-new bleeding-edge hardware that needs a new featu= re added in 5.1 that is not available in previous versions -- then 5.1 provi= des absolutely no benefit. Any tweak that 5.1 provided to help with Spectre performance mitigation, etc.. will likely be backported and in a LTS kern= el.
I have Arch (that always runs the current upstream version of the kerne= l, 5.1.9 currently), and Arch also provides an LTS kernel using 4.19. I have= a SuSE leap 42.3 install running the 4.4 kernel, SuSE leap 15.0/15.1 instal= ls with the 4.12 version, I have a Pi running Debian/jessie with the 4.9 ARM kernel, and from a general computing/feature/functionality standpoint, it makes no difference.
Now if you have bleeding-edge hardware that is only supported in the la= test greatest kernel -- then yes, there is a difference, otherwise you won't k= now the difference.
HTH
--=20 David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Thanks David,
This is my thinking as well. I have no real bleeding edge tech, I tend to stay away from it. Just wanted to challenge me decision , in case I was wrong.
The only time it really counts is where you might need millisecond control of a valve. For your stuff, which sounds like a big distributed farming operation, I suspect one second, up to 20 seconds to open/close a valve is essentially a never mind as long as it can be done at whatever temp might be ambient for the valve at the time.
Then there are occasionally preempt-rt kernels.
This install from a testing version of the LCNC iso, is debian stretch based and has a 4.9.0-9-rt-amd64 kernel, packaged as 4.9.168-1+deb9u2 (2019-05-13) Except for the kernel substitution, its stretch 9.8.
It is the lowest latency kernel by at least a magnitude I've every ran a latency-test on, under 20 microseconds, which for this old slow phenom, is downright amazing. I could even run software stepping on it if I wasn't in a hurry. But as far as a routine file copy, its no faster at moving gigabytes around than a stock kernel. But as has been said, unless you have bleeding edge hardware, you will not see a diff. And bleeding edge today, means its some variation of an arm cpu. Sure, there's now a 64 core threadripper rizen cpu's out there from amd, but at the price per, around 3G's a socket, I suspect only going into supercomputers paid for with taxpayer sheckles. So that's not a concern to you or I.
Kate
To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
Cheers, Gene Heskett