3 ms·
Git, for example, used by millions of developers every day.
by gpderetta 3y ago
Git, for example, used by millions of developers every day.
- GoblinSlayer 3y agoWindows kernel uses UTF-16, so reencoding happens anyway, even if you don't know about it.
- im3w1l 3y agoCrazy idea... but what if you stored the files in a fast purpose-built database instead of the normal file system. You would have to mount it I suppose, to be able edit the files. But I think it could be very performant.
- gpderetta 3y agoThe filesystems is a database for storing files already. There is no particular reason a different approach be faster in principle.
- kmeisthax 3y agoGit actually does have a separate disk format that's way more database-like, but it's only used for older data that doesn't need to be shuffled around as often. Git was written assuming the filesystem is decently fast at metadata mutation, which is a good assumption on Linux and less so on Windows.
- im3w1l 3y agoGit needs some queries that filesystems arent very good at natively, like "get all modified files". There are workarounds but yeah.
- mdaniel 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFS I was actually secretly cheering for that project, because I thought it could be actually innovative But, as I look back on that with my modern understanding of Microsoft's backward compatibility focus, I realize such a thing would never, ever fly
- justsomehnguy 3y ago.WAD .PAK .PK3
- civilized 3y agoIt's still going to be a tiny fraction of what git does, so speeding it up will have a negligible impact on performance.
- cerved 3y agoGit reads and writes a lot of files in the working tree as well as the object store. It's a large part of what it does
- civilized 3y agoI'm aware that passing a file name is a part of working with a file. I'm just skeptical that it's such a large fraction of the computation that optimizing it would provide a noticeable performance boost.