-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Explanation #2
Comments
It's very shady that author did not mention copy-on-write anywhere in readme. |
I'd like to know that too. Copy is a simple operation, just read and write, so what does fcp do to make it faster? |
Personally, I like to know the details on the reason it is faster other than the performance benchmarks on the README. Otherwise one can always study the code I guess. Also anyone knows what file-system is being used here for the benchmarks? |
There is some discussion that took place on the hackernews regarding the same https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27523014 |
@AgainPsychoX The primary reason |
Hello @baverman, Copy-on-write is mentioned implicitly in the footnote explaining the large performance difference on the "Large Files" benchmark run on macOS, which mentions the |
See my response above and some of the discussion on hackernews than you linked for an explanation as to the performance. The filesystem used for the Linux benchmarks was xfs. |
An explanation for |
Can you explain why is it so much faster?
Why this method not in kernel/base linux or other systems?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: