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

How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

blogs.msdn.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 274 posts

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#131

Post by trentnelson »

niels_olson wrote: post #125
trentnelson wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I qualified it as "Linux/UNIX kernel" because I wanted to emphasize the kernel and not userspace. Solaris event ports are good, but they're still ultimately backed by a readiness-oriented I/O model, and can't be used for asynchronous file I/O.

Here's a nice graphical comparison of syscalls between Linux and Windows http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/project.cfm?id=392 Are you saying the Windows flow looks like spaghetti only because the software tested software (Apache) wasn't designed for Windows?

Heh, 10 years old, original link doesn't work, image is tiny. And it sounds like they were comparing Linux and Apache to IIS and Windows.

It's hard to evaluate this in any way more than "yeah that's a cute spaghetti diagram". If I wanted to drag Linux through the mud visually I'd depict how much time every socket I/O op spends in vfs/fsync stuff. (i.e. you can depict anything to make your point)

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#132

Post by asveikau »

bigger_cheese wrote: post #109
l3m0ndr0p wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some, or maybe this is not part of the NT Kernel... 1. The use of drive letters A-Z for file system access. 2. Creating symbolic links to files and folders, like you can in Unix/Linux. You have to set a setting somewhere to enable this, but there's a security risk. 3. Standard functional/usable non-gui terminal application like Unix/Linux ssh. PowerShell doesn't come close. 4. Ability to SUDO or su Admin lik…

My biggest pet Peeve about Windows is the way it accesses files I'm not sure if this is a kernel or filesystem issue. But when a remote user has a file open as long as that file is open other users are prevented from updating or replacing the file. It happens all the time at my work and I know of no obvious way to work out who has the file open because as far as I can tell nothing like lsof exists. This is probably t…

What you can do while it's open is partially defined by the dwShareMode parameter in CreateFile. Unfortunately a lot of people look at the daunting documentation, shrug, and put 0 there, which is the least permissive mode. A lot of libraries do that too.

OTOH there are other limits that are not dictated by dwShareMode. Such as deleting files while handles are open - this blocks a new file with the same name from being created until all handles are closed. That's probably the worst one. There are some other crappy ones involving directory handles that I don't care to enumerate.

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#133

Post by jsmeaton »

niels_olson wrote: post #125
trentnelson wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I qualified it as "Linux/UNIX kernel" because I wanted to emphasize the kernel and not userspace. Solaris event ports are good, but they're still ultimately backed by a readiness-oriented I/O model, and can't be used for asynchronous file I/O.

Here's a nice graphical comparison of syscalls between Linux and Windows http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/project.cfm?id=392 Are you saying the Windows flow looks like spaghetti only because the software tested software (Apache) wasn't designed for Windows?

The second image is of IIS running on Windows, not Apache. Different software on different OSes. Regardless, it doesn't seem like parent is making the argument that the NT kernel isn't complicated - just that it is superior.

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#134

Post by trentnelson »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #105
trentnelson wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To quote myself: > The “Why Windows?” (or “Why not Linux?”) question is one I get asked the most, but it’s also the one I find hardest to answer succinctly without eventually delving into really low-level kernel implementation details. > > You could port PyParallel to Linux or OS X -- there are two parts to the work I’ve done: a) the changes to the CPython interpreter to facilitate simultaneous multithreading (platfo…

http://pyparallel.org/wrk-rps-comparison2.svg According to your website pretty much every other technology runs better on Linux than it does on Windows, and of course pyparallel runs better than everything you tested. How can I run these tests my self? I specifically want to test it against golang.

See here: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/3jhv80/pyparal...

Source: https://github.com/tpn/pyparallel-tefb

Go-specific comment thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/3jhv80/pyparal...

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#135

Post by binarycrusader »

trentnelson wrote: post #116
jen20 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never met a single person who understood what they were talking about and referred to a "UNIX kernels". It may be true that Linux was once less advanced than NT - this is no longer the case, despite egregious design flaws in things like epoll. It has simply never been true (for example) for the Illumos (nee Solaris) kernel.

I qualified it as "Linux/UNIX kernel" because I wanted to emphasize the kernel and not userspace. Solaris event ports are good, but they're still ultimately backed by a readiness-oriented I/O model, and can't be used for asynchronous file I/O.

Solaris event ports most certainly can be and are used for async I/O. I'm not sure how you can claim otherwise:

https://blogs.oracle.com/dap/entry/libevent_and_solaris_even...

https://blogs.oracle.com/praks/entry/file_events_notificatio...

And Solaris, (unlike Linux historically at least), supports async I/O on both files and sockets. Linux (historically) only supported it for sockets. I have no idea if Linux generally supports async I/O for files at this point.

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#136

Post by WayneBro »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #103

You should also mention that you're the author of Windows only software that directly exploits certain features specific to Windows. An implementation of python that according to http://pyparallel.org/ out-performs pretty much every other technology. Is that correct? I'm also wondering if anyone has replicated these results? From what I can find not a single person has replicated your tests. According to your own web…

I guess you should also mention on each of your comments that you are extremely biased against and paranoid about Microsoft and that you actively target any popular Microsoft article posted here in order to inject something negative, whether it's relevant or not.

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#137

Post by cbd1984 »

orbifold wrote: post #128
cbd1984 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Audio on Linux works fine in my experience.

Well for various definitions of fine I guess.

It works fine as in "I can listen to audio on my laptop from multiple programs at once, with a centralized way to control audio volume on a per-application or per-sound-device basis." I literally cannot imagine any audio system doing better than that given the hardware I have to work with.

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#138

Post by trentnelson »

WayneBro wrote: post #136
zxcvcxz wrote: post #103

You should also mention that you're the author of Windows only software that directly exploits certain features specific to Windows. An implementation of python that according to http://pyparallel.org/ out-performs pretty much every other technology. Is that correct? I'm also wondering if anyone has replicated these results? From what I can find not a single person has replicated your tests. According to your own web…

I guess you should also mention on each of your comments that you are extremely biased against and paranoid about Microsoft and that you actively target any popular Microsoft article posted here in order to inject something negative, whether it's relevant or not.

Heh.

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#139

Post by trentnelson »

e12e wrote: post #126
trentnelson wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm incredibly biased. But that bias has come from assessing the technical details and concluding that NT really is superior, if that's any consolation. PyParallel flogs the Windows versions of things like Go, Node and Tornado because none of those were implemented in a way that allows the NT completion-oriented I/O facilities to be optimally exploited. It's depressing, honestly. In the sense that open source softwar…

Now I'm curious; have you played with reactOS at all? Do they implement the same VMS paradigm? That is, if given decent hw drivers for io on ReactOS, could one expect performance on the same order of magnitude as with a new nt-derived kernel?

I haven't actually. Although now I'm kind of curious.

Re: How the Windows Subsystem for Linux Redirects Syscalls

#140

Post by kristopolous »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #42
dragonbonheur wrote: post #12

.

Linux Subsystem for Windows could also be misread the same way. Both are ambiguous.

I initially thought this one was less ambiguous but I have to admit, I think Microsoft's phrasing is right. Let's try some substitution:

"Russia Factory for England" most likely exists inside of Russia and is for the English.

"John's mail for Sally [try: who is out of town]" even with the addition, I presume that John has authored mail for Sally and is not collecting the parcels to give to her.

Here's a trickier one:

"Sampsons' Dinner for Two". This could be the following:

1. A product named "Sampsons' Dinner for Two" bought from a retail store

2. An item "Dinner for Two" on a menu from a restaurant named "Sampsons"

3. A place named "Sampsons' Dinner for Two" with only two-person tables.

4. A product "Sampsons' Dinner" which comes in multiple sizes, one of them being designed for two people. (which is the ambiguous form - presuming there's also say Annie's Dinner for One/Two and Martha's Dinner for One/Two - each with a brand specific cuisine). Even here though, the ownership of which "Dinner for Two" product is still clear - it's the "Sampsons'" or "Martha's" brand.

Regardless of what kind of substitution, we go back to "Windows Subsystem for Linux" for the most part parsing as

"Windows [Subsystem for Linux]" like "Windows [Media Player]". I don't assume that it's "[Windows Media] Player" - as in some multi-platform software that is tasked with playing the proprietary windows media formats.

It seems weird, but I think it's unarguably the right choice.

Post reply on HN