Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Windows on Btrfs

lilysthings.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 286 posts

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#61

Post by solarkraft »

ygra wrote: post #39
solarkraft wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find it right now, but I believe there was a talk from a Rust maintainer a while ago about the Rust installation being way slower than it should be, which was almost entirely a rant on Windows file system performance.

That one perhaps? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbKGw8MQ0i8 I don't recall it particularly ranty, though.

That's it, thank you!

I chose the word because I remembered it being a bit rant-adjacent ("we're used to doing it this way, ... but windows does it that way"). But it's been a while since I watched it (not particularly attentively either, to be honest). That's just what stuck.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#62

Post by michaelmrose »

LukeShu wrote: post #23

I'm intending to write up some docs and announce it in the next few days, but since this thread is here, I might as well mention it now: On the topic of alternative btrfs implementations, I've been working on https://git.lukeshu.com/btrfs-progs-ng/ which is written entirely in Go. Its `btrfs-rec inspect mount --pv=/dev/whatever` is a read-only FUSE implementation of btrfs that is more fault-tolerant (of corrupt files…

That is really neat have you considered contributing this to btrfs as a recovery option or putting out an ISO with this as a recovery tool?

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#63

Post by robotnikman »

c7DJTLrn wrote: post #46

Speaking of Windows storage drivers, years ago, I managed to get Windows to boot and run entirely in RAM using some fairly obscure tools from the reboot.pro forums. I always wanted to have an immutable Windows system that I could manage like cattle. Unfortunately, setting up such a system was extremely complicated and a manual process. I am aware that Windows now has a driver called UWF that functions a bit like an o…

UWF does come in handy for things like thin clients from my experience.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#64

Post by jwrallie »

josephcsible wrote: post #60
chmod775 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given there's now native NTFS support in the Linux kernel, you could also do that that the other way around.

I wonder which direction causes more breakage for the non-native OS.

I think getting around permissions would be an issue but when I was starting on Linux I remember there was a way to install to Fat32 inside a directory in parallel with Windows 95. The distro was called Phat, so the concept is not exactly new.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#65

Post by mappu »

overthrow wrote: post #51
garaetjjte wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing particularly wrong with NTFS, it's Windows filesystem architecture that is slow.

I'd love to see a benchmark of NTFS on Windows vs NTFS on Linux. Unfortunately ntfs-3g uses FUSE so right now it's not really a fair comparison.

Linux has an upstream kernel driver for NTFS, you don't need fuse ntfs-3g any more (well, they have different quirks such as how UNIX permissions are emulated).

The readwrite driver is new, but it always had an older readonly driver too, which would be fine for benchmarking.

Back in 2011 Tuxera's proprietary Linux NTFS driver was maybe faster than ext as well: https://www.phoronix.com/news/OTU5Ng

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#66

Post by netsharc »

nailer wrote: post #27

Whoa. So why didn’t the Windows store work? Some kind of trusted environment thing?

There are some hints in this document, like the OS needing to lock down installed app files:

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/msix/desktop/deskt...

Or this issue: https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/visualstudio-docs/issues/33...

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#67

Post by overthrow »

mappu wrote: post #65
overthrow wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to see a benchmark of NTFS on Windows vs NTFS on Linux. Unfortunately ntfs-3g uses FUSE so right now it's not really a fair comparison.

Linux has an upstream kernel driver for NTFS, you don't need fuse ntfs-3g any more (well, they have different quirks such as how UNIX permissions are emulated). The readwrite driver is new, but it always had an older readonly driver too, which would be fine for benchmarking. Back in 2011 Tuxera's proprietary Linux NTFS driver was maybe faster than ext as well: https://www.phoronix.com/news/OTU5Ng

Thanks I wasn't aware of that, I stand corrected

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#70

Post by bentcorner »

c7DJTLrn wrote: post #46

Speaking of Windows storage drivers, years ago, I managed to get Windows to boot and run entirely in RAM using some fairly obscure tools from the reboot.pro forums. I always wanted to have an immutable Windows system that I could manage like cattle. Unfortunately, setting up such a system was extremely complicated and a manual process. I am aware that Windows now has a driver called UWF that functions a bit like an o…

You can boot Windows off a VHDX, which might serve your same needs. I'm running like this right now - it has a few quirks but works pretty well.
Post reply on HN