Page 1 of 1

Size of ISO-IMG file has NOTHING to do with RAM usage

Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2024 5:02 pm
by Clarity

There is a mis-understanding that has been rampert in this forum for YEARS!

It is the concept of ISO size having something to do with distro operations and performance.

People who keep pushing this concept are WAY off base! I saw this very good post, today, and wanted to bring this to the light it deserves:

dimkr wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2024 9:21 pm

Extra files on disk don't increase RAM consumption, running applications do. An unused library is just a library, it doesn't contribute to RAM consumption if no running application is using it.

I am NOT advocating that members/development change what they do. RATHER, I am hoping that the community rallies around a clearer understanding that an ISO/IMG is a 'DELIVERABLE" ... not a positive/negative operational because of its large/small size.

Every-time I see member mis-understandings of RAM, I cringe! Hope this post is beneficial. It serves to bring awareness of both deliverables and app/package size in relation to operational RAM use.

FYI


Re: Size of ISO-IMG file has NOTHING to do with RAM usage

Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2024 7:08 pm
by amethyst

What is true though, is that older versions of applications may and usually do use less RAM. Take browsers for example. Generally, older versions of browsers use less RAM (and processing power) and are also much smaller in size. Also - Puppy's default setting is to copy the Puppy files to RAM at startup. This WILL use more RAM for storage if the distribution is bigger.


Re: Size of ISO-IMG file has NOTHING to do with RAM usage

Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2024 7:28 pm
by Clarity

Here is a report from a forum moderator on this forum that could be helpful in understanding. This report is for WoofCE PUPs

I am aware that depending on boot stanza, or the pfix= parm, will dictate system operations at PUP's start.

A good review.


Re: Size of ISO-IMG file has NOTHING to do with RAM usage

Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2024 7:38 pm
by williwaw

you can boot puppy, disconnect the disk and still use it.
not so with other OSes
can you explain that difference? what do you call it?


Re: Size of ISO-IMG file has NOTHING to do with RAM usage

Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2024 4:53 pm
by bigpup

That is normal operation of Puppy as a live or frugal install and the save file/folder is not on the same disk.

All the Puppy OS is in RAM except the save.

This was mainly a feature for booting from a CD/DVD install and have the save on some other drive.
This allowed removal of the Puppy CD/DVD, so the CD/DVD drive could be used for something else.

But also works with live or frugal install on a USB drive, as long as save is on some other drive.

The save file/folder is always mounted and setup as read/write.
So drive it is on has to stay mounted.


Re: Size of ISO-IMG file has NOTHING to do with RAM usage

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 9:16 pm
by williwaw
bigpup wrote: Sat Feb 17, 2024 4:53 pm

All the Puppy OS is in RAM except the save.

so there is a distinction between saying something is in ram versus some process consuming ram to peform an operation?


Re: Size of ISO-IMG file has NOTHING to do with RAM usage

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 11:09 pm
by esos

Extra files on disk don't increase RAM consumption, running applications do

Pet, sfs and Sytem without applications installed.
Sfs is activated at booting time.
Pet is installed in the system and I think it will affect the booting time also.
My opinion: Booting time consider more usage of memory.