Originally Posted by break19
A better idea would have been to do something more similar to MacOS's HFS+ filesystem.
|
I admit I am completely unfamiliar with Mac. Linux and Windows are my areas of expertise if one can truly be an expert in such things
. I find I can never keep up. The not being able to defrag a mounted FS does sound like a weakness though it sounds like it does a decent job of keeping things up. Note though that defragging as you read files would have to produce overhead, which for some may not be desirable. I think the "correct" solution would be to support multiple file systems, but that becomes a support nightmare. Part of the reason NTFS is the official windows file system is because it is simple, users can't do crazy things with hardlinks, softlinks, and symbolic links, and then call support and ask why Word doesn't work anymore.
Originally Posted by Dreadlorde
Ubuntu also have their own forums, I don't remember the link, but you can get to them from the ubuntu website.
|
There is
http://ubuntuforums.org/ for forums, also many howtos can be found at
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/. Lastly, I have never googled <anything> ubuntu and not gotten results.
Originally Posted by Dreadlorde
You have a point, but isn't that what DRI is for? From what I've read about it, DRI is supposed to help rid of the overhead between the window system and the hardware. I could be wrong (and correct me if I'm wrong).
|
Your 100% correct, and that does eliminate some of the problem since the windows manager no longer relies on system calls to get and the hardware (for any here who haven't done systems programming, system calls=slow), What I was referring to however was the window manager communing with the kernel itself rather than the hardware. When integrated with the kernel its literally just a memory access, separated another scheme is needed, and system calls are unacceptably slow for something like a GUI. Any kind of scheme however won't be as fast as the direct memory access (not to be confused with hardware DMA
).(Linux does indeed have a scheme)
I'm not saying its wrong. It may be a better solution, as the separation would lead to a simpler GUI and a simpler kernel, each of which could probably be more easily optimized. The gains might outweigh the cost. With all the Windows haters out there though I just feel the need at times to be the voice of reason and point out that Microsoft isn't made up of
total morons. Just your average morons.
Originally Posted by Dreadlorde
|
Hmm... I may have to check it out. It looks efficient, but is it as sexy as my dear enlightenment?
Originally Posted by Dreadlorde
I found that with my hardware, reiserfs for my / (root) and ext2 for my /home partitons is great. I plan on trying out Btrfs and Ext4 soon though, they have a bunch of interesting features.
|
I am entirely unfamiliar with reiserfs, so I have no idea how it works. I wouldn't put anything critical on btrfs as it still does not have an official release. As for ext4 your right it has some nice looking features. The physical layout on the disk though is still similiar to Ext3 so I wouldn't expect any massive jumps in performance. Its a bit too new for me to have worked with much, since most of my time goes into productions environments, so I can't say anything for sure. If you do get anything amazing with it, I'd love to hear about it!