Zentyal Desktop On Steroids

[FarquahrWindsor]

Just been having a play and I am really surprised out how fast this feels.
I have been using my usual 64 bit standard zentyal install.

I have been playing with LTSP and was trying to get another distro going and thought hold it this one is ubuntu based.

So I added the zentyal ppa. sudo add-apt-repository ppa:zentyal/3.0 into bodhi
did an sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get install zentyal-core
sudo apt-get install zentyal-software

choose a blank sql password and keep at standard https

also get rid of network manager sudo apt-get remove network-manager

And wow its really speedy someone give it a go and see if its not just me.


ps http://www.bodhilinux.com/ if you wondered

[robb]

So you claim that the Enlightenment desktop environment is a lot faster than LXDE desktop in Zentyal? That would be remarkable since LXDE already is very light.

[christian]

  light vs. fast 

Main goal of such distro is not to be faster but lighter. It may happen, under some condition, that result is a bit faster but I would be surprised that, assuming you have enough  horse power, difference is that huge.
Again, answering to your point in IRC:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ubuntu_1204_3264&num=1

[FarquahrWindsor]

http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1209247-AR-ZENTYALDE61

http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1209240-AR-ZENTYALDE32

Just a small test as its takes a bit of time.

I only posted because I have always used the 64 image. I could instantly feel that the system was faster.

Thats 32 vs 64 Zentyal desktop.

I think the only way is to try it but the proof is in the tasting.

Bodhi and Zentyal desktop 32 are not much different with bodhi the quicker.

I think I might try a vanila lubuntu and install zentyal from apps and see how that goes.

Its would be good to have a benchmark area so users can spec equipment.

Bodhi has origins in the embedded arena so it is very light chris.

My main emphasis is why is does my 64bit install feel so slow you can just tell by using the web gui.

[christian]

I do not discuss whether this is light or not, I said "do not mix up light and fast".
Plus benchmark you posted is showing much better postmark score for 64 bits and almost similar results in other benchmarks. Am I correct ? 

[FarquahrWindsor]

Yeah on disk transactions its almost double.

I have a feeling that making a coffee and my screensaver might have something to do with that.

I am going to do some more conclusive tests but on both 32 bit applications the web app feels and responds like a binary.
Its there

On the 64 bit on avaerage I am waiting between 2 to 10 secs.

All clean installs all running the same.

I will run some tests on bare metal if I get the chance as I have my i5 quad core but later this week I quad core xeon.

If anybody has the time and can run up the 32 vs 64 comparison I would be interested.
My MB supports PAE so I am prob gonna install 32 at the weekend.

[robb]

Ok, so now you have 2 benchmarks: 1 x86 and 1 x64

These are both running the Zentyal LXDE desktop?
Then you need to run 2 more benches with the enlightenment desktop to make a comparison or am I missing something?

On a sidenote: I think I have ever logged in to the desktop only once or twice. I would opt for a headless system rather than installing another desktop environment.

[FarquahrWindsor]

Robb my original post wasn't really about Bodhi, yes its a very light and fast desktop and enlightenment e17 is a very interesting DE.

My point was that on a standard Zentyal install from supplied ISO's the Zentyal Desktop is installed and for some reason just from using both the 32 bit version feels much faster than the 64 bit version.

This surprised me.

I have found that my system runs much better on the https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+package/linux-image-3.2.0-24-generic-pae which is for 64bit systems with PAE.
I am slightly confused at the moment as Precise seems to bring in a choice of kernel options that previously wasn't a consideration.

I guess it all depends on what you are going to do.

If you are running a virtualisation on your server then you are better going for a true 64bit if you have a 64bit processor.
If you don't then you may find the above with PAE works better for you.

To be honest its a pain as to try all these options takes time.

The thing is that I am finding with my current I5 64 bit quad core is that it runs faster on 32bit than 64bit.
I have a 64 bit xeon quad to install the weekend after this and its all getting a bit confusing what to choose.

I guess generic and have a large kernel is the best option.

I don't usually run a DE on my servers and it has always made me wonder why its included as default in the zentyal ISO.
I presume the Zentyal ISO is for the newcomer to Zentyal and so makes it as easy as possible.

There have been requests for headless operation but the call doesn't seem to be of a priority but the ability to be able to turn off any DE in the admin GUI would be most welcomed.
http://forum.zentyal.org/index.php/topic,11831.msg48184.html#msg48184

I do things my preferred way of a standard Ubuntu server ISO and I try to make the system as minimalistic as possible.
Which means for me F6 expert mode (I wish they would change the name of that) and F4 minimalistic with only ssh-server installed as my memory makes CLI without copy and paste a chore.

I really like Bodhi as a client I am really interested in it as a thin client as its origins are in the embedded arm arena.
Only reason I used it for a DE was to try and get LTSP to use another image than Ubuntu still trying

Farquahr

[EDIT]
Strange one thing I did from normal (my normal)

From reading track the public gpg key needs to be updated for archive.zentyal...
I noticed rather than my apt-get install zentyal-core apt-get install zentyal-software that apt-get install zentyal would do it all for me
So I did and I was unable to connect to either nics shown in ifconfig
I thought about installing a DE but thought I will just try again my normal way.
So this time fresh install and apt-get install zentyal-core apt-get install zentyal-software.
This time no problem.
In apt-get install zentyal are the firewall rules for ssh missing ?

As I should of loaded the DE to check, typical after a conversation as such this should happen.

Farquahr 

[FarquahrWindsor]

On a sidenote: I think I have ever logged in to the desktop only once or twice. I would opt for a headless system rather than installing another desktop environment.

This is something that has had me confused with the advent of the new LTSP modules.

I am new to LTSP but it would seem that LTSP in basic terms provides an SSH X11 forwarding method.
My argument that LTSP isn't a server on a server distro and can be viewed as a server in a server distro.
http://forum.zentyal.org/index.php/topic,12133.msg49453.html#msg49453

Now I have my headless server running but I have no x-server or configuaration files.
So when I boot my thin client after logon the LDM SSH X11 forwarding logon bangs out and restarts.
I am unsure of the connection between LSB http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base.
If you run an LTSP-info it will tell you that no modules are running.
If you install LSB and connect in headless mode then at least it tells you an error.
There are no .x conf files in your home directory and its unable to create an x session.

There is a total lack of anything coming near descent in the terms of documentation with LTSP.
So I can't blame Zentyal for a few missconceptions. LTSP is as confusing as hell.

I don't think running LTSP in your only PDC Domain controller is a good idea from a point of security and robustness.
There is no separation in address space and I am still trying to get my head round this one but LTSP doesn't just run applications on the server it actually runs the applications installed on the server.

Or its just that the configuration files on the server are not created because there is no need being headless.
If so its my confusion.
Which ever way I still think clients and main server should be separate entities and that either the current LTSP implementation is for synced LTSP servers that connect to the main PDC.

Or like my long winded topic about LXC containers and providing security and server distro independance.

Farquahr

[EDIT]

You can test this by adding apps into the chroot and then running a client. Until you install the apps into the server your clients will not have those apps.
I guess you could select to run local apps and install them into the chroot but still the majority of processes are still the servers processes.
I still can't get my head round running local apps on a thin client. Only for the fact it isn't really a thin client if you are doing so.
I like the idea of spreading processor power but I guess its all a question of dipping your toes to see how much local resources applications such as firefox utilise on there own.
I guess it wouldn't be polite to a thin client running a choice of local apps to be called a fat client so in a increasing effort to keep PC I will refer to it as rotund.
 
 

[robb]

I think I have posted this link before, but have a look at this: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Desktop/PXE
It will give you a fat client image on a diskless client system.

[FarquahrWindsor]

Rob you seem to missing the point that LTSP is really great for providing that quite easily and also provides a chroot distro.
That bit of LTSP is really good.
Its just a simple method to run a desktop in a container on zentyal with ltsp included. Its really simple to dconf-editor or gsettings browse and change options for system and application preferences.

Yeah you could use just a simple pxe but you have to think of network layers that are visible and available as-well.
Thanks for showing me that. As thats the great thing about containers as it gives choice.

I am going to create another thread on something that I am going to try and do.

 

[FarquahrWindsor]

Rob also the only reason the zentyal LTSP implementation isn't working as a fat client is because the .conf doesn't have the right directives. Its a bug not a limitation.