View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
bytex n00b
Joined: 30 Jun 2024 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 9:04 am Post subject: Should I not switch from Arch to Gentoo w/ laptop hardware? |
|
|
The lightness of the init software. Things like customization what draws me to Gentoo but Since I only have 240GB of NVMe as storage, I was a bit skeptical about the installation.
Does constantly installing software from source with a lot of R/Ws shorten the life of SSD? Should I use regular HDD instead as main storage?
is there a tool to make my own gentoo iso?
once I tried to install Gentoo base before. It was a bit complicated or I left it half-done because of urgency. Now I wanna work on my custom gentoo base ISO on VM first
this laptop's hardware tell me your opinions if gentoo is not suitable for me. What about disadvantages of using Gentoo compared to arch linux?
right now the file system is out of control, I will certainly do a new fresh install and I was just re-thinking of using Gentoo..
Code: |
[archlinux@net ~]$ neofetch
-` archlinux@net
.o+` -------------
`ooo/ OS: Arch Linux x86_64
`+oooo: Host: VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X509JB_X509J
`+oooooo: Kernel: 6.11.3-arch1-1
-+oooooo+: Uptime: 1 hour, 12 mins
`/:-:++oooo+: Packages: 1266 (pacman), 7 (flatpak)
`/++++/+++++++: Shell: bash 5.2.37
`/++++++++++++++: Resolution: 1366x768
`/+++ooooooooooooo/` WM: awesome
./ooosssso++osssssso+` Theme: Adwaita-dark [GTK2/3]
.oossssso-````/ossssss+` Icons: Tela-light [GTK2/3]
-osssssso. :ssssssso. Terminal: xterm
:osssssss/ osssso+++. CPU: Intel i5-1035G1 (8) @ 3.600GHz
/ossssssss/ +ssssooo/- GPU: Intel Iris Plus Graphics G1
`/ossssso+/:- -:/+osssso+- GPU: NVIDIA GeForce MX110
`+sso+:-` `.-/+oso: Memory: 2620MiB / 3723MiB
`++:. `-/+/
.` `/
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Banana Moderator
Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 1760 Location: Germany
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
sMueggli Guru
Joined: 03 Sep 2022 Posts: 500
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why do you fear that a SSD is dying too early? How do you calculate the lifetime of a SSD?
Every part of your laptop can fail at any time.
Gentoo allows you to work-around nearly every problem. Building Gentoo on your laptop will probably not be a lot of fun in the long term. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bytex n00b
Joined: 30 Jun 2024 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alright thanks for links, this has only 4gb ram. it says portage can write to the RAM only (with tmpfs support) and never to ssd. would I be totally exempt from writes to the disk?
*Increase my RAM amount to 16gb and let Portage use some of it and the system use the rest.
*I'm not who uses a desktop environment anyway + Getting rid of system-d also reduce some of RAM usage.
In short, how much ram is relatievely good for when using with tmpfs? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bytex n00b
Joined: 30 Jun 2024 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
sMueggli wrote: | Why do you fear that a SSD is dying too early? How do you calculate the lifetime of a SSD?
Every part of your laptop can fail at any time.
Gentoo allows you to work-around nearly every problem. Building Gentoo on your laptop will probably not be a lot of fun in the long term. |
i'm saying building from source instead of binary based system like Arch = more writes to the SSD
In theory, this is the case. In practice, people who have used this distro for a long time will know better.
from gentoo/SSD wiki page
Quote: | Slowing wear out
Each write operation performed on a NAND flash cell causes its wear. This fact limits the SSD lifespan. The cell endurance varies with used technology[6]. On the other hand, read operations are straightforward and do not cause cell wear.
A basic method increasing SSD lifespan is to uniformly distribute writes across all the blocks. This method is called wear leveling and is deployed via SSD firmware.
From system point of view, it is appropriate to generally reduce amount of writes. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hu Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007 Posts: 22727
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 11:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
A tmpfs will avoid unnecessarily writing intermediate results to disk, yes. The right size for a tmpfs is for it to be big enough for everything you want to put in it. If you make it smaller, you will be unable to use it for big builds, and those are the ones most likely to take long enough that their intermediate results spill to disk. If you use a lean system (no DE, minimal GUI), you can get by with a fairly small tmpfs. Making the tmpfs too big at mount time is harmless, as it only uses RAM for what is actually stored. However, if you make it too big and then try to fill it, you could run out of memory. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003 Posts: 54588 Location: 56N 3W
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My 250G SSD from 2012 has an expected write life of 180 years.
it's already too small.
I don't expect to be using that SSD in 180 years fbr several reasons :), so it's write life is not a problem to me.
QLC SSDs should be avoided if possible.
They are still new tech. Never buy version 1.0 of anything. _________________ Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
flysideways Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2005 Posts: 494
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Building in a tmpfs used to be a large performance boost when using spinning disk hard drives. Now, with M2 SSD drives there is not much of a reduction in time spent on an emerge. It does move some writes off of the SSD.
If this is correctly your laptop, https://www.crucial.com/compatible-upgrade-for/asus/x509jb , Crucial says it will accept a 16GB module. Apparently there is also 4GB soldered onboard.
I am impressed with the manufacturers that supply service manuals to the end users. https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/nb/Customer_self_repair_guide/X509JB_Customer_Self_Repair_Guide_20210709.pdf?model=X509JB
It looks like both the memory and M2 SSD are upgradable on that laptop.
Currently, most packages take less than 2GB per thread to emerge, there are some that use a bit more than 2GB per thread.
There is guidance in the wiki on creating per-package solutions to the individual, large resource needing, packages. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Goverp Advocate
Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Posts: 2182
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't forget that building in a tmpfs will reduce your systems memory available to the compiler. If, say, you want to compile qtwebengine, you need every available byte! AFAIR Libreoffice is another build-time memory hog. If you want to compile either of these you may need too much of your memory dedicated to tmpfs for the source unpack phase of the ebuild to leave enough for the actual compilation!
You can get more mileage with compressed tmpfs - see the wiki article on zram.
The same can also be true of swap space if you use zswap (wiki article), which can reduce SSD I/O rates but again at the cost of memory available to portage. There's some clever balancing to be done here.
For similar reasons, I avoid "-pipe" in my CFLAGS. _________________ Greybeard |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003 Posts: 54588 Location: 56N 3W
|
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2024 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is no reason to avoid -pipe on memory constrained systems.
It gives gcc permission to -pipe temporaray files between phases. It's not a command.
When there is not enough RAM, these files will go to disk anyway. _________________ Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rfx Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 19 Apr 2023 Posts: 145 Location: de-by
|
Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2024 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you are worried about your laptop hardware because of compiling, you can also use the binary project from Gentoo |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Goverp Advocate
Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Posts: 2182
|
Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2024 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
NeddySeagoon wrote: | There is no reason to avoid -pipe on memory constrained systems.
It gives gcc permission to -pipe temporaray files between phases. It's not a command.
When there is not enough RAM, these files will go to disk anyway. |
I live and learn. Thanks. _________________ Greybeard |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pingtoo Veteran
Joined: 10 Sep 2021 Posts: 1289 Location: Richmond Hill, Canada
|
Posted: Wed Oct 23, 2024 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Goverp wrote: | NeddySeagoon wrote: | There is no reason to avoid -pipe on memory constrained systems.
It gives gcc permission to -pipe temporaray files between phases. It's not a command.
When there is not enough RAM, these files will go to disk anyway. |
I live and learn. Thanks. | I suggest set TMPDIR if you wish to not use "-pipe".
I think GCC put these stage file in /tmp if TMPDIR is not set and since this thread is also about SSD usage so one may want to review where to put those GCC stage files. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|