[clug] Runlevel 5 vs 3 and startx

[Michael James]

> On 24/11/05, Michael James <Michael.James at csiro.au> wrote:
> > For a workstation, set the runlevel to 5.  No argument.
> >
> > For a server, I've always set the runlevel to 3, (to save resources)
> >  logged on in plain text, then used startx because I want graphics.
> > (Even if only to have 2 terminals side by side.)

> > Am I just being old-fashioned keeping my servers at runlevel 3?
> > Is there no real resource penalty to having them at 5 all the time?
> > (If it's just a bit of inactive RAM, it'll soon be swapped out.)

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 06:34 pm, Mr B wrote:
> Out of curiosity, I did some (very rudimentary) tests a while ago were
> I logged on remotely and measured loads on the system in various
> states.  One of the things I noticed was when the system was just
> sitting at the (default) gdm login screen it used almost no  more
> CPU/Memory power than if I was in RL 3.
> 
> It was a different story once X started and a lot of crap started
> chewing resources.  Now if it's something I can do in text mode I just
> Ctrl+Atl+F1 and log in on a text window, but the graphical display is
> there if I need it (seemingly) without the overhead.  Also noticed
> that it unloaded everything when I logged out and went back to the
> login screen.  Was just wondering if there is another reason to not
> leave it on the login screen or if it's just a hangup from the old
> days?

So it IS old-fashioned keeping servers at runlevel 3.

I'll take that suggestion and keep them at 5 from now on.
Using an alt F1 console for text. (if that's what I want)

Thanks for that,
michaelj

-- 
Michael James                         michael.james at csiro.au
System Administrator                    voice:  02 6246 5040
CSIRO Bioinformatics Facility             fax:  02 6246 5166

No matter how much you pay for software,
 you always get less than you hoped.
Unless you pay nothing, then you get more.