Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

Speed differences - be more specific (Miscellaneous)

posted by sol, 06.12.2007, 18:32

> > Even if it appears fast, internal hard drive caches and the like can make
> > it appear faster than it is.
>
> BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Exactly. If you knew anything about this sort of thing, you'd actually understand what I'm saying and code something better :)

> > Besides, why would FreeDOS have a intelligent algorithms to read files,
> > but a really stupid method to write them?
>
> Because I optimized *read* operations, and don't care much about write
> operations.
I don't see anyone with "tom" in their name in the commit list, but I'll assume maybe you're "Bart Oldeman", "PerditionC" or "Pasquale J. Villani".

Besides, why on earth would you optimize reads but not writes, that's downright stupid?

> Wow. This guy has *really* good knowledge of a filesystem.
> Now sit don't, grab your copy of the FreeDOS kernel source, and show the
> rest of the world how it should be done. talk is cheap.
I do actually. The crappy FAT FSes and many more :)

Anyway, FreeDOS seems to use 'getblk', which in turn uses 'dskxfer'

Every call to getblk uses:
if (!overwrite && dskxfer(dsk, blkno, bp->b_buffer, 1, DSKREAD))

And every other call I've seen to dskxfer uses that "1" as well, which is the # of blocks to read write.

What's this mean? FreeDOS does exactly what I said - it's reading either 1 sector a time, or 1 cluster at a time. I don't really care to dig deeper into this piss to determine which - especially since I've already proven my point.

Now why don't you try to back up your cheap talk?

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 449 users online (1 registered, 448 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum