K12LTSP centos 5 vs. K12Linux

[rmcdaniel at indata.us]

The issues that I have been having with K12Linux have been performance
related, some of the problems are certainly the result of the flash
intensive app (kids college - learning through sports).  I am running
another lab with duplicate hardware/setup that is utilizing K12LTSP
Centos 5.  When the K12LTSP is booted up (30 clients), the clients all
load quite fast.  The K12Linux lab boots considerably slower and many of
the clients seem to be waiting their turn to boot.  I don't consider my
clients, HPT5530, to be low end.  They are much beefier than others that
I have been running for 4 years on K12LTSP without any performance
issues.  I would stick with K12LTSP Centos 5 if I didn't have the
frigging sound problem with flash that is so common.  The K12Linux
installation doesn't have any sound issues.  We use another program,
Practice Planet, that is a mix of java and flash and IMO better
developed for a lab environment. 

btw, I do appreciate all of the hard work that is being devoted to
K12Linux:)

Ron

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: K12LTSP centos 5 vs. K12Linux
From: Peter Scheie <peter at scheie.homedns.org>
Date: Fri, November 07, 2008 1:42 pm
To: Development discussion of K12Linux <k12linux-devel-list at redhat.com>

rmcdaniel at indata.us wrote:
> The more that I try and get a lab running with K12Linux, the more
> frustrated I become. Why does it seem that K12LTSP Centos5 greatly
> outperforms K12Linux. Is the difference due to LTSP 4.2 vs. LTSP 5? I
> have also given Edubuntu 8.1 a try and end up experiencing all of the
> crazy DHCP problems that seem to plague certain installations. Is this
> really progression??? Sorry for the rant, but I have been working on a
> single lab with 30 clients for two weeks. The K12LTSP install would
> have been done in about 2 hours...
>
>
> Ron McDaniel
> rmcdaniel at indata.us
>
> 
Performance-wise, yes, the demands of LTSP 5 on the client are greater 
than those of LTSP4.2. If your clients are slower than, say 400mhz and 
have less than 128MB of RAM, they'll probably seem slower than when 
running under the 4.2-based K12LTSP. OTOH, 4.2 was a highly optimized 
configuration that did not lend itself to updating with new drivers as 
they became available. LTSP 5 also much better suited for leveraging 
the work of the distros, which is paying off well as demonstrated the 
packages available now for multiple distros. Not to mention local 
apps. The performance issue *is* of concern to people who, like me, 
like to use old hardware for clients. But I also recognize that as time 
goes by, the low end 'used PC' client has become faster & faster. LSP 
4.2 isn't being developed any more, and the development model used for 
it was not sustainable long-term. But if K12LTSP-EL5 does was you want, 
don't bother with the upgrade. Go with what works for you.

The K12Linux installations I've done so far have been quite easy, 
especially if you start with the Live USB version. But it's only been 
with a small number of clients. Is it just performance issues you're 
having or something else? 

Peter

_______________________________________________
K12Linux-devel-list mailing list
K12Linux-devel-list at redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12linux-devel-list