From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org>
To: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
Cc: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 17:14:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200601091714.27303.oliver@neukum.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1136822646.9957.35.camel@mindpipe>
Am Montag, 9. Januar 2006 17:04 schrieb Lee Revell:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 17:02 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Montag, 9. Januar 2006 16:15 schrieb Lee Revell:
> > > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 15:28 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > > Am Montag, 9. Januar 2006 15:18 schrieb Robert Hancock:
> > > > > Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> > > > > > Well, I could find more or less reasonable explanation of this behaviour - different VM policies of two OSes and
> > > > > > strangely strong and persistent belief "Free RAM is a wasted RAM" among kernel devs. Free RAM is not a wasted RAM, its a memory waiting to be used !
> > > > > > Whenever it is needed by apps I'm launching or working with.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is no different VM policy here, Windows behaves quite similarly.
> > > > > It does not leave memory around unused, it uses it for disk cache.
> > > >
> > > > That doesn't mean that the rate of eviction is the same.
> > > > Is it possible that read-ahead is not aggressive enough?
> > >
> > > Enough for what? What is the exact problem you are trying to solve?
> >
> > Quicker application startup.
>
> Why do you look to the kernel first? The obvious explanation is that
> Linux desktop apps are more bloated than their Windows counterparts.
It is the most efficient place. An improvement to the kernel will improve
all starting times.
Regards
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-09 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <5t06S-7nB-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <5t34G-3Zu-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <5t5pU-7tD-37@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <5t5JU-7Sn-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
2006-01-09 14:18 ` Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time Robert Hancock
2006-01-09 14:28 ` Oliver Neukum
2006-01-09 15:15 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 16:02 ` Oliver Neukum
2006-01-09 16:04 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 16:14 ` Oliver Neukum [this message]
2006-01-09 16:19 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 16:29 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-09 16:41 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 16:53 ` Oliver Neukum
2006-01-09 16:56 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 17:14 ` Olivier Galibert
2006-01-09 17:28 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 19:35 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2006-01-10 10:32 ` File type by extension is evil (was Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time) Bernhard R. Link
2006-01-10 20:28 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 17:14 ` Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-09 17:31 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-09 16:45 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2006-01-09 17:33 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 18:11 ` Marcin Dalecki
2006-01-09 17:45 ` Oliver Neukum
2006-01-09 16:59 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-10 1:44 ` Alistair John Strachan
2006-01-10 4:30 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-10 10:13 ` Jakob Oestergaard
2006-01-10 10:34 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-01-10 23:48 Lukas Hejtmanek
2006-01-10 23:57 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-11 0:02 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-09 7:54 Boxer Gnome
2006-01-09 8:06 ` Erik Andersen
2006-01-09 8:21 ` Boxer Gnome
2006-01-09 8:53 ` Jim Crilly
2006-01-09 9:07 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 10:22 ` Alistair John Strachan
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 12:45 ` CaT
2006-01-09 13:34 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-10 13:29 ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-10 16:29 ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-01-11 2:29 ` David Nicol
2006-01-11 2:56 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-12 18:53 ` David Nicol
2006-01-12 21:05 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 13:36 ` Kasper Sandberg
2006-01-09 13:56 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 16:07 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-09 16:15 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 16:34 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-09 16:34 ` Olivier Galibert
2006-01-09 19:24 ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-09 19:33 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 13:54 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 14:32 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-09 15:22 ` Denis Vlasenko
2006-01-09 19:07 ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-09 22:49 ` Dave Airlie
2006-01-10 12:00 ` Pavel Machek
2006-01-09 13:56 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-10 7:13 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-10 7:33 ` Denis Vlasenko
2006-01-10 8:33 ` D. Hazelton
2006-01-10 10:49 ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-10 13:26 ` Denis Vlasenko
2006-01-11 4:57 ` D. Hazelton
2006-01-10 9:32 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-10 9:20 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-10 10:50 ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-09 16:32 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200601091714.27303.oliver@neukum.org \
--to=oliver@neukum.org \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).