On 27 November 2010 17:22, Sven Barth <pascaldra...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 27.11.2010 18:16, Jürgen Hestermann wrote: >> >>> Calling the system to ask for the last-modification time that often >>> (even with all/most data cached by the OS) would take that long on >>> Windows, while under Linux it wouldn't even take a single second... >> >> But how does it come that there can be such a difference doing nearly >> the same things on Linux and Windows? I can't believe that Windows is >> *such* a bad design. They all cook with water I think. > > It would be interesting to see a comparison on the same filesystem. E.g. > fat32 or ext2 (using ext2ifs). NTFS is a bad example because it is > implemented on Linux using a user file system driver (fuse), which might > influence the performance test.
This would be a useless comparison in so many ways. ext2 drivers performs _way_ worse under windows, due to code quality. there just aren't that many people interested in a high performance ext* driver for windows, understandably. Also, the features of the filesystems are so different, you can't even compare them. fat and ntfs are stuck in the dark ages compared to ext*. There is an in-kernel NTFS implementation, but it's no good for writing. Henry -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus