On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 07:05:50 +0200 rustyBSD <rusty...@gmx.fr> said: > Le 28/09/2012 01:41, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) a écrit : > > On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:55:39 +0200 rustyBSD <rusty...@gmx.fr> said: > > > >> > Le 27/09/2012 18:24, rustyBSD a écrit : > >>> > > Le 27/09/2012 12:10, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) a écrit : > >>>> > >> and that's what i did. a fixed buffer of 64kb is malloced - and > >>>> > >> random filled or 0xff filled as per before - but just written 64k > >>>> > >> at a time. and yes - it handles the tail that may not be a full 64k > >>>> > >> too. > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> here's the question... this is pretty lame security-wise. shouldn't > >>>> > >> we be military/cia/nsa spec and overwrite it at least 7 times? :) > >>>> > >> oh and this will probably/possible get screwed by logging fs's or > >>>> > >> flash media that may shuffle the blocks around on write :) ie it > >>>> > >> wont help. > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> anyway... why not do it 7 times and then we can say "not even the > >>>> > >> cia can get your warez after this!" :) > >>> > > I planned to do something like this. > >>> > > > >>> > > I don't have commit access, and I wait for vtorri to commit > >>> > > other patches. > >>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> > > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > >>> > > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > >>> > > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > >>> > > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;258768047;13503038;j? > >>> > > http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html > >>> > > _______________________________________________ > >>> > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > >>> > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >>> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > >> > Oh I just saw you already committed a patch. > >> > > >> > But... it's bad. If I'm removing a BIG (> 2go) file, > >> > how can I cancel ? I can't. And there is no progress > >> > bar. > > well... it's no worse than your original patch/code... which would try > > allocate 2gb of ram... then write it all at once (and if alloc failed it'd > > refuse to do the rm overwrite at all_. :) > > > > Can you please revert your changes ?
why? its better than the code that was there (your patch). your patch did this: 1. find out size of file 2. alloc memory for ENTIRE file 3. fill buffer with random data or 0xff 4. write whole buffer in 1 write call 5. fsync the file this will be JUSt as slow and blocking as the code there now, except the code now doesn't need as much memory. if it was a 2gb file u'd need 2gb of ram or it'd fail. now it needs a fixed 64k. so why revert it? it's an improvement. -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got visibility? Most devs has no idea what their production app looks like. Find out how fast your code is with AppDynamics Lite. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;262219671;13503038;y? http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
