PDA

View Full Version : [other] [SOLVED] Is Openbox heavier than fluxbox



Inxsible
July 5th, 2008, 07:50 AM
I have noticed that my default setup for Openbox tends to take more memory than my Fluxbox install.

Openbox is over Arch and on startup, it takes about 46MB

Fluxbox is over Debian and on startup, it takes about 23MB

They both have sshd and conky running on startup. Here are the two ps_mem charts immediately on boot

Openbox:
sudo python ps_mem.py
Password:
Private + Shared = RAM used Program

88.0 KiB + 29.0 KiB = 117.0 KiB crond
92.0 KiB + 26.0 KiB = 118.0 KiB init
96.0 KiB + 35.5 KiB = 131.5 KiB portmap
104.0 KiB + 73.0 KiB = 177.0 KiB hald-addon-acpi
144.0 KiB + 67.0 KiB = 211.0 KiB xinit
168.0 KiB + 46.0 KiB = 214.0 KiB famd
228.0 KiB + 20.0 KiB = 248.0 KiB udevd
136.0 KiB + 113.0 KiB = 249.0 KiB hald-addon-input
200.0 KiB + 61.5 KiB = 261.5 KiB dbus-launch
148.0 KiB + 117.0 KiB = 265.0 KiB hald-addon-storage
164.0 KiB + 109.0 KiB = 273.0 KiB hald-runner
276.0 KiB + 69.5 KiB = 345.5 KiB openbox-session
304.0 KiB + 135.0 KiB = 439.0 KiB agetty (5)
328.0 KiB + 146.0 KiB = 474.0 KiB dbus-daemon (2)
440.0 KiB + 42.0 KiB = 482.0 KiB syslog-ng
276.0 KiB + 211.5 KiB = 487.5 KiB startx
444.0 KiB + 78.5 KiB = 522.5 KiB login
560.0 KiB + 57.5 KiB = 617.5 KiB sshd
1.0 MiB + 144.0 KiB = 1.2 MiB hald-addon-dell-backlight
848.0 KiB + 599.0 KiB = 1.4 MiB bash (2)
1.0 MiB + 537.0 KiB = 1.5 MiB conky
1.8 MiB + 227.5 KiB = 2.0 MiB hald
3.4 MiB + 301.5 KiB = 3.7 MiB urxvt
5.2 MiB + 1.5 MiB = 6.7 MiB fbpanel
6.8 MiB + 1.2 MiB = 8.0 MiB openbox
16.2 MiB + 561.0 KiB = 16.8 MiB Xorg
---------------------------------
46.8 MiB
=================================

Private + Shared = RAM used Program Fluxbox :
python ps_mem.py
Private + Shared = RAM used Program

188.0 KiB + 184.0 KiB = 372.0 KiB dhclient3
88.0 KiB + 328.0 KiB = 416.0 KiB klogd
316.0 KiB + 220.0 KiB = 536.0 KiB ssh-agent
156.0 KiB + 448.0 KiB = 604.0 KiB syslogd
124.0 KiB + 496.0 KiB = 620.0 KiB anacron
332.0 KiB + 348.0 KiB = 680.0 KiB udevd
152.0 KiB + 552.0 KiB = 704.0 KiB init
352.0 KiB + 416.0 KiB = 768.0 KiB getty (5)
144.0 KiB + 640.0 KiB = 784.0 KiB xinit
456.0 KiB + 428.0 KiB = 884.0 KiB dbus-daemon
136.0 KiB + 752.0 KiB = 888.0 KiB hald-addon-acpi
216.0 KiB + 760.0 KiB = 976.0 KiB cron
572.0 KiB + 432.0 KiB = 1.0 MiB sshd
168.0 KiB + 940.0 KiB = 1.1 MiB hald-addon-cpufreq
184.0 KiB + 940.0 KiB = 1.1 MiB hald-runner
168.0 KiB + 956.0 KiB = 1.1 MiB hald-addon-input
240.0 KiB + 896.0 KiB = 1.1 MiB su
336.0 KiB + 836.0 KiB = 1.1 MiB login
700.0 KiB + 508.0 KiB = 1.2 MiB acpid
304.0 KiB + 972.0 KiB = 1.2 MiB hald-addon-storage (2)
436.0 KiB + 1.0 MiB = 1.4 MiB startx
488.0 KiB + 1.0 MiB = 1.5 MiB avahi-daemon (2)
1.4 MiB + 1.6 MiB = 3.0 MiB mrxvt-full
1.9 MiB + 1.1 MiB = 3.0 MiB hald
1.3 MiB + 2.0 MiB = 3.3 MiB conky
3.6 MiB + 1.4 MiB = 4.9 MiB bash (3)
3.3 MiB + 2.7 MiB = 6.0 MiB fluxbox
6.8 MiB + 1.0 MiB = 7.9 MiB Xorg

Private + Shared = RAM used Program

Warning: Shared memory is slightly over-estimated by this system
for each program, so totals are not reported.Unfortunately, my Fluxbox install doesn't add up the memory for some reason, but conky tells me 27MB

Could someone shed some light on this?

atomkarinca
July 5th, 2008, 09:12 AM
I think to make a decent comparison you should try both of them on the same distro. In my experience a vanilla Openbox has always been lighter than a vanilla Fluxbox.

urukrama
July 5th, 2008, 10:32 AM
Is the difference noticeable enough to worry about it?

Inxsible
July 5th, 2008, 05:28 PM
Is the difference noticeable enough to worry about it?Its a 256MB RAM system, so the additional 20 MB at boot is not a problem. But the moment I start Opera in Openbox or Iceweasel in Firefox, another 60-70 MB are consumed. It is during one of those browsing sessions when I have close to 15 odd tabs open when the additional 20 MB matter.

Inxsible
July 5th, 2008, 05:30 PM
I think to make a decent comparison you should try both of them on the same distro. In my experience a vanilla Openbox has always been lighter than a vanilla Fluxbox.Yes, I thought about the same thing, that the compare wasn't "accurate" since they were on different distros. But given that Arch is more minimal than a Debian install, I would have expected the opposite.


But then again, I did a business iso install of Debian - so that's pretty minimal as well.

atomkarinca
July 5th, 2008, 06:39 PM
For the Openbox session, you can check /etc/xdg/openbox/autostart.sh and remove the things that you don't need.

urukrama
July 5th, 2008, 07:37 PM
Your Openbox one also has a few additional things running that aren't there in the Fluxbox session (like fbpanel). That makes a difference too.

Inxsible
July 6th, 2008, 12:05 AM
For the Openbox session, you can check /etc/xdg/openbox/autostart.sh and remove the things that you don't need.I don't use the global autostart at all. Nothing there that I wanted, and my personal autostart only has fbpanel and conky and eval command to set my wallpaper. My fluxbox too has the fbsetbg to set my last wallpaper and conky.


Your Openbox one also has a few additional things running that aren't there in the Fluxbox session (like fbpanel). That makes a difference too.
Yes, but then fluxbox gives its own panel and I definitely need a taskbar so I was trying to compare a usable (for me) environment.

Even if we only compare the two WMs, in the instance that I listed, Openbox takes up 8 MB whereas Fluxbox takes 6MB

I am not trying to nitpick here. Just that I had heard that Openbox was even more minimalist (which it is since no panel - i don't know where else could one go even more minimalistic after Openbox and PekWM) and lighter - which unfortunately, for my installs its not.

Of course I don't know what would happen if I installed both on the same distro. I have a Debian + Xfce install and I am planning to chuck Xfce altogether and try some new WM like awesome or xmonad maybe. I might just try and install Openbox on it and compare if both fluxbox and openbox on debian give me different results.

Inxsible
July 6th, 2008, 12:09 AM
BTW...urukrama, I have checked out your openbox blog and it is really good. Lots of good stuff !

p_quarles
July 6th, 2008, 06:55 AM
Window managers cannot and should not take responsibility for any memory except what they themselves are using. So, the comparison here is really 6 MB vs. 8 MB.

Also, the Xorg setup on each system is pretty dramatically different -- I'd guess there's a significant difference in the way the two are using memory. There are too many variables there for a direct comparison to give a definite sense of which WM uses less memory at startup.

urukrama
July 6th, 2008, 11:50 AM
Which Openbox version are you using, btw? The latest version (3.4.7) runs lighter on this computer than the older versions did.

I remember testing the difference between fluxbox and Openbox about a year ago. Fluxbox came out lighter then, but the difference wasn't enormous (something like 6 vs 7 MB). That is small enough for me for all the goodness you get in Openbox.

Inxsible
July 6th, 2008, 01:50 PM
Which Openbox version are you using, btw? The latest version (3.4.7) runs lighter on this computer than the older versions did.

I remember testing the difference between fluxbox and Openbox about a year ago. Fluxbox came out lighter then, but the difference wasn't enormous (something like 6 vs 7 MB). That is small enough for me for all the goodness you get in Openbox.
Yes i am using the latest 3.4.7 from the Arch repositories.

I guess then it would still be the same as I am getting 6 vs 8 MB.

Can you tell me what's better in Openbox than fluxbox in your opinion? I am new to Openbox, so I would like to know.

basenvironment
July 6th, 2008, 07:54 PM
I would worry about some of the other stuff you are running/using rather than the 2mb difference in *box. And if I wanted something lighter but with certain features I would go with icewm rather than either of those.

urukrama
July 6th, 2008, 09:21 PM
Yes i am using the latest 3.4.7 from the Arch repositories.

I guess then it would still be the same as I am getting 6 vs 8 MB.

Can you tell me what's better in Openbox than fluxbox in your opinion? I am new to Openbox, so I would like to know.

Its themeing options are much more elaborate than Fluxbox', I find its window switching (alt-tab) much better, it tells you when a window is not responding and gives you the option to kill it, if you use GDM you can shutdown or reboot without administrative privileges, etc. The developers have paid a lot of attention to details and options that many users might never notice but that make Openbox stand out. I also find it manages windows better, but that could be very well a subjective judgement. Overall, Openbox just feels more polished to me than Fluxbox.

Give it some time, read through the documentation and don't be afraid to try things out.

Inxsible
July 8th, 2008, 12:32 AM
Alright !!
I gotta take back what I said,

I restarted the machine and logged into Arch and ran ps_mem.py....I got Openbox using 2.7 MB. Its freaking awesome. Even fbpanel is taking up twice as much as Openbox.

I guess, Openbox, Fluxbox and IceWM all range anywhere between 2-10 MB. So you cannot really judge them by comparing one instance.

Here's my new ps_mem.py for Openbox
bash-3.2# python ps_mem.py
Private + Shared = RAM used Program

88.0 KiB + 27.0 KiB = 115.0 KiB crond
92.0 KiB + 25.0 KiB = 117.0 KiB init
100.0 KiB + 34.5 KiB = 134.5 KiB portmap
100.0 KiB + 71.0 KiB = 171.0 KiB hald-addon-acpi
140.0 KiB + 72.0 KiB = 212.0 KiB xinit
168.0 KiB + 46.0 KiB = 214.0 KiB famd
136.0 KiB + 111.0 KiB = 247.0 KiB hald-addon-input
228.0 KiB + 20.0 KiB = 248.0 KiB udevd
156.0 KiB + 100.0 KiB = 256.0 KiB su
148.0 KiB + 115.0 KiB = 263.0 KiB hald-addon-storage
160.0 KiB + 107.0 KiB = 267.0 KiB hald-runner
272.0 KiB + 63.5 KiB = 335.5 KiB openbox-session
356.0 KiB + 28.0 KiB = 384.0 KiB dbus-daemon
312.0 KiB + 130.0 KiB = 442.0 KiB agetty (5)
280.0 KiB + 172.5 KiB = 452.5 KiB startx
356.0 KiB + 115.0 KiB = 471.0 KiB login
436.0 KiB + 41.0 KiB = 477.0 KiB syslog-ng
552.0 KiB + 57.0 KiB = 609.0 KiB sshd
1.0 MiB + 142.0 KiB = 1.2 MiB hald-addon-dell-backlight
1.0 MiB + 539.5 KiB = 1.5 MiB conky
1.2 MiB + 635.5 KiB = 1.9 MiB bash (3)
1.8 MiB + 220.0 KiB = 2.0 MiB hald
1.5 MiB + 1.1 MiB = 2.7 MiB openbox
3.4 MiB + 296.5 KiB = 3.7 MiB urxvt
5.1 MiB + 1.5 MiB = 6.6 MiB fbpanel
16.1 MiB + 578.5 KiB = 16.6 MiB Xorg
---------------------------------
41.5 MiB
=================================

Private + Shared = RAM used Program