Hi,

> On 29.01.2019, at 02:01, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jan 27, 2019, at 11:57 PM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 28.01.2019, at 01:39, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> By "the image" I assume you mean the SqueakSource server image.  But
>>> opening the file takes very little time.  Original web-sites were
>>> .html files, remember how fast those were?  Plus, filesystems "cache"
>>> file contents into their own internal caches anyway...
>>> 
>>> Yes, it still has to return back through alan but I assume alan does
>>> not wait for a "full download" received from andreas before its
>>> already pipeing back to the Squeak client.  If true, then it seems
>>> like it only amounts to saving one hop, which would hardly be
>>> noticeable over what we have now.
>> 
>> 
>> No, the difference is actually orders of magnitude.
>> Believe us. W.r.t. file handling nginx is blazing fast and squeak a snail.
> 
> And this is an issue in commercial engagements where we might be trying to displace VW.  The file implementation sucks.  We need buffered i/o by default and we need  good finalization (via ephemerons).  And right now there’s a thread on Pharo about de eye slowdowns from 6 to 7 in writing to the changes file because of setToEnd and maybe reopen.  In any case the issue is that our time system is cheap and cheerful (= kind of crappy) and being conscious of performance here is important and potentially healthy for the community.
> 
> If you want to have impact here is a place to put effort.

Thanks for that insight! :)
	-t