SShortSingh.
Back to feed

Ollama vs llama.cpp in 2026: Key Differences and When to Use Each

0
·52 views

Ollama and llama.cpp are two popular ways to run large language models locally, but they serve different use cases rather than being direct competitors. Ollama functions as a managed service that wraps a patched version of llama.cpp, handling model storage, scheduling, and automatic loading with a simpler interface. Direct llama.cpp, by contrast, gives users granular control over GPU placement, KV cache settings, and runtime flags, making it better suited for advanced or production configurations. Ollama is generally recommended for users who want a quick, low-friction setup for local chat, coding assistants, or scripting tasks. Those who need fine-grained performance tuning, immediate access to new llama.cpp features, or native Prometheus metrics are better served by running llama-server directly.

Read the full story at DEV Community

This is an AI-generated summary. ShortSingh links to the original source for the complete article.

Discussion (0)

Log in to join the discussion and vote.

Log in

Related stories

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Fixing GitHub Actions 'reusable workflow was not found' errors

This error means a uses: reference was correctly formatted but could not be resolved to a workflow file. GitHub checks the file path, the ref on the target repository, read access for the caller, and whether the file declares workflow_call, stopping at the first failure. Runs with this error end instantly with no jobs or logs, and the annotation shows a chain of references where the last entry is the one that failed. That failing reference is often inside a nested workflow the user did not write. Developers are advised to read the chain bottom-up and verify the path, ref, and access against the owning repository.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Indonesia's Official Port List Gets Coordinates via New Open Port API

A developer converted Indonesia's National Port Master Plan (RIPN), an official scanned PDF annex under ministerial decree KP 432/2017, into structured data covering 1,082 ports. The dataset adds latitude and longitude for 468 ports, matched against OpenStreetMap, the NGA World Port Index and UN/LOCODE. Coordinates are included only when they pass verification checks, such as multiple independent sources agreeing within 5 km or an exact name match within the same province and regency, and no estimated positions are used. Many ports, mostly small local and ferry ports, still lack coordinates, though they remain in the dataset with their official names and hierarchy. The data is offered through the Port API on API Indonesia, with some recent regulatory amendments not yet applied.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Critical Red Hat Quay flaw CVE-2026-123710 lets attackers take over registry signing keys

Red Hat has disclosed CVE-2026-123710, a critical vulnerability in Red Hat Quay's service key server, scored 9.8 out of 10. According to Red Hat, an unauthenticated network client can obtain an anonymous token, use it to install its own trusted signing key, and then access private images or overwrite existing tags. The flaw affects Red Hat Quay 3 and 5, including standalone deployments, the Quay Operator on OpenShift, and the mirror registry for OpenShift. Upstream fixes were merged on 11 November 2026, and Red Hat has published patched builds for several Quay 3 branches. Coverage reviewed so far reports no known in-the-wild exploitation, though the situation is described as developing.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

csperf Episode Explains the Tool's Limits Using Doctor and List-Backends Checks

A DEV Community article argues that performance tools which silently refuse questions can erode user trust in their measurements. It presents csperf as a measurement observatory rather than an all-answering performance oracle. The episode uses the doctor and list-backends commands to reveal what the tool can and cannot assess, so missing answers are not mistaken for failures. Doctor checks the compilers, libraries, and runtime support csperf depends on, while list-backends shows which capabilities can be probed. The author ran these diagnostics on an Ubuntu 22.04 workstation with an Intel i7-12700K.