4 ms·
Title seems a bit off, per caveat below...why not use the original title, "WinFsp Performance Testing" (?) "The comparison to NTFS is very important to establi
by iokevins 10y ago
Title seems a bit off, per caveat below...why not use the original title, "WinFsp Performance Testing" (?)
"The comparison to NTFS is very important to establish a baseline. It is also very misleading because NTFS is a disk file system and MEMFS (either the WinFsp or Dokany variants) is an in memory file system. The tests will show that MEMFS is faster than NTFS. This should not be taken to mean that we are trying to make the (obvious) claim that an in memory file system is faster than a disk file system, but to show that the approach of writing a file system in user mode is a valid proposition and can be efficient."
- billziss 10y agoPlease suggest a more appropriate title and I will be happy to change it if it better conveys the results. Please also note that I want to convey that my solution is faster than Dokany, which is a competitor solution.
- IsBisu 10y agoYou should better say that YOUR MEMFS implementation is better on Winfsp that YOUR MEMFS implementation on Dokan. This is even not a far comparison.