For the same reason spoken languages often have semantic structures that make a literal translation often cumbersome and incorrect, translating nontrivial code from one language into another without being a near expert in both langauges, as well as being an expert in the project in question, can lead to differences in behaviour varying from “it crashes and takes down the OS with it”, to “it performs worse”.
A rather overly simplistic view of filesystem design.
More complex data structures are harder to optimise for pretty much all operations, but I’d suggest the overwhelmingly most important metric for performance is development time.
Yes, but note that neither the Linux foundation nor OpenZFS are going to put themselves in legal risk on the word of a stack exchange comment, no matter who it’s from. Even if their legal teams all have no issue, Oracle has a reputation for being litigious and the fact that they haven’t resolved the issue once and for all despite the fact they could suggest they’re keeping the possibility of litigation in their back pocket (regardless of if such a case would have merit).
Canonical has said they don’t think there is an issue and put their money where their mouth was, but they are one of very few to do so.
Opengear in Brisbane; development teams often use Linux.
Brand new anything will not show up with amazing performance, because the primary focus is correctness and features secondary.
Premature optimisation could kill a project’s maintainability; wait a few years. Even then, despite Ken’s optimism I’m not certain we’ll see performance beating a good non-cow filesystem; XFS and EXT4 have been eeking out performance for many years.
License incompatibility is one big reason OpenZFS is not in-tree for Linux, there is plenty of public discussion about this online.
I’ll also tac on that when you use cloud storage, what do you think your stuff is stored on at the end of the day? Sure as shit not Bcachefs yet, but it’s more likely than not on some netapp appliance for the same features that Bcachefs is developing.
In addition to the comment on the mentioned better hardware flexibility, I’ve seen really interesting features like defining compression & deduplication in a granular way, even to the point of having a compression algo when you first write data, and then a different more expensive one when your computer is idle.
This is actually a feature that enterprise SAN solutions have had for a while, being able choose your level of redundancy & performance at a file level is extremely useful for minimising downtime and not replicating ephemeral data.
Most filesystem features are not for the average user who has their data replicated in a cloud service; they’re for businesses where this flexibility saves a lot of money.
Regarding 1: if you open up dmesg after it happens and you see an error regarding “No edid read”, your GPU is having a hard time automatically getting the monitor’s edid over display port. My 7800xt has this issue.
If your monitor setup doesn’t change much, you can manually set the edid on a per output basis. Here is a good guide.
Also, regarding 3: you may need to set your amdgpu feature mask in your kernel parameters.
Care to elaborate?
If you’re messing with ACLs I’m not sure deduplication will help you much; I believe (not much experience with reflinks) the dedup checksum will include the metadata, so changing ACLs might ruin any benefit. Even if you don’t change the ACLs, as soon as somebody updates a game, it’s checksum will change and won’t converge back when everyone else updates.
Even hardlinks preserve the ACL… Maybe symlinks to the folder containing the game’s data, then the symlinks could have different ACLs?
I actually found the opposite with my steam library; on ZFS with ZSTD I only saw a ratio of 1.1 for steamapps, not that there’s really any meaningful performance penalty for compressing it.
So this is a system-wide DNS hijack for the purpose of filtering and monitoring?
So say an attacker can enable this service, would they then be able to redirect any DNS query regardless of if DNS over TLS + DNSSEC are configured? Surely I’m reading this wrong
Given the user always has a deeper access to the client (i.e. hardware access) than the anticheat dev does, eliminating cheating is probably unsolvable.
Best bet is probably always going to be a decently funded team dedicated to find and ban cheaters, rather than attempting to prevent them all with a rootkit.
I’ve seen some optometry equipment running RHEL
About a year ago I moved to Hyprland & Wayfire for my NVIDIA & Intel boxes. Moved NVIDIA to Radeon a few months back and had mixed results.
Recently tried Plasma 6 for experimental HDR and am impressed.
deleted by creator
No, I’m saying that when people run into strange bugs, sometimes they put together an issue (like the person behind cve-rs), and sometimes they quietly work around it because they’re busy.
Seeing as I don’t often trawl through issues on the language git, neither really involve notifying me specifically.
My lack of an anecdote does not equate to anecdotal evidence of no issue, just that I haven’t met every rust developer.
They’re not trivializing, just noting that the different things you need to discuss for kernel development compared with other work. It is very different in a lot of ways, and does shape your perspective. I also find it interesting.