Actually listened to the podcast before. Happy that everything with the kernel situation kinda seemed to work out for you.
You kinda talked about ec already, but is there an ETA for resilvering?
You were talking about Valve helping in a big way. Was this monetary or development work? If development I would be interested because a while ago I know you do mainly correctness and features right now, but on the phoronix forum you were talking about low hanging fruits for performance work. Was that something of interest to valve/is it something being done right now to make bcachefs a good fs for gaming (whatever that means...)
I'm hoping to have erasure coding done sometime in the first half of next year (knock on wood).
While reconcile was getting done we got a detailed outline of where EC resilvering is going to plug into that, so it's not looking like a huge amount of work anymore - and there's been people testing EC and reporting the occasional bug, it's been looking pretty solid.
We did some performance testing not too long ago, and it looked like we were in better shape than I thought. I'm still more interested in tracking down performance bug than shaving cycles and going for raw IOPS.
And the userbase isn't complaining about performance at all, aside from the odd thing like accounting read being slow (just fixed a couple issues there) or lack of defrag.
After debugging and stabilization, it's going to be more about usability, fleshing out missing features, more integration work (there's some systemd integration that needs to happen in the mount path), telemetry/introspection improvements (I want all the data I can get for stabilization, and json reporting would be good for lots of things).
So, if you're asking if you can help, that's a decent list to start from :)
yes, it will. But we do want to communicate properly with systemd and let the user know what's going on if mount has to take awhile because of some sort of recovery (instead of timing out), and various other things.
related, plymouth integration to let users know when their machine is booting up if a drive or the filesystem is unhealthy
Yeah and your experience is 2 years out of date. Especially in recent months the firefox for android experience got better exponentially.
I am a tab hoarder (a few thousand open tabs) and 2 years ago firefox needed 15 seconds on a fresh start to load. It's instantanious now.
Firefox for android tried to force "inactive" tabs down my throat (I'm sure it helps, but no I don't want it. You can easily disable it in the tabs settings btw). Tabs that didn't get used for 2 weeks get put in an "inactive" state.
A few months ago switching to an open tab took a few seconds up to a minute. For a month or two it's now instantanious.
There are way more optimizations done and I can often tell right away when something got better or worse.
Suffice to say your "experience" is so much out of date it is not even funny. Comparing firefox 2 years ago today is a joke and firefox feels completely different (user interface and speed) and your comment only spreads FUD. Anybody reading this that hasn't tried firefox for android - give it a try!
It's not "just spreading FUD", I disclosed the timeline of when I used it and why I don't think it was a good app. Whether or not it's better now doesn't change the fact that two years ago they had an objectively terrible app that I had a terrible experience with that they still put their name on, and as such I am going to associate it with the experiences I've had. That's not weird; I can only really assess things based on the experiences I've had with them.
I'm glad it has improved but I feel like you claiming this is implying dishonesty on my end, and I do not think that's fair.
I was not claiming dishonesty and I'm sorry if it felt that way. My main problem is that a review of software that is getting updates as often as firefox that is based on 2 year old experience feels so wrong.
I myself am no stranger to critizing firefox. They have done some thigns that made me nearly switch multiple times. But especially in recent times I feel that they are finally getting their act together (vertical tabs in firefox, performance optimizations, actually asking for feedback, ...) and I know that for me user reviews on hn are more valuable than random bloggers I find through $searchengine. Your comment is actually way more transparent than those blogs that have no date mapped to them or are just AI spam or whatever so again sorry for not giving credit where credit is due, I just find it unfair to write under a recent article experiences that are far from the present reality. (sorry for rambling and being kinda incoherent)
The fact that they released an app in such a horribly broken state in 2023 (with such horrible UX with behavior that literally no one wants their phone to have) still says a lot about their development process and does not speak well for what they think is "production ready". They attached their name on it, they didn't say it was "alpha" or "beta", and as the saying goes, you only get one chance at making a first impression.
Again, this isn't weird, this is how everyone acts. If you got food poisoning at a restaurant the first time you went, you might not be inclined to go back to that restaurant even if someone tells you "I swear man, it's gotten better, they wash their hands now!"
This isn't a rag-tag team of people working in their basement for fun. Mozilla Corporation is a for-profit company and as such it's not wrong to compare them to Google or Apple.
Kind of a bad example. Firstly because you are comparing windows with the Linux kernel. The Linux kernel has excellent backwards compatibility. Every feature introduced will be kept if removing it could break a userland application.
Linus is very adamant about "not breaking userspace"
The main problem with backwards compatibility (imho) is glibc. You could always ship your software with all dynamic lobs that you need, but glibc does make it hard because it likes to move awkward and break things.
Glibc is one of the few userspace libraries with backwards compatibility in the form of symbol versioning.
Any program compiled for glibc 2.1 (1999!) and later, using the publically exposed parts of the ABI, will run on modern glibc.
The trouble is usually with other dynamically linked libraries not being available anymore on modern distributions.
I always use a configured!(F2) htop (not mentioned as well). Always enable PSI information in htop (some red hat systems I work with still don't offer them...).
If you have zfs enable those meters as well and htop has an io tab, use it!
Clicking on the article on that site gets me back to the HN link.
I guess that's just a landing page with links to articles he wrote, but doesn't host himself?
Strange.
And it really is ugly right now with the spotted background and slightly rotated links.
Is he aiming for the "I just discovered a new feature and so need to use it" vibe? Like when someone makes a PowerPoint presentation and now uses the completely over the top transitions across slides?
But design is subjective, and if you're doing something in your free time, you better enjoy it! So if he has fun making that ugly thing, great ( • ‿ • )
The fact that people can’t see beauty in a thing like this feels to me like people looking at a field of flowers and calling it ugly for all the ways it doesn’t look like Disney Land.
