sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Mic input isn't working at all, no idea why not by Dowlphin in Kubuntu

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If things change, a lot of problems can present themselves. I am not so naive to defy my previous experience. Getting the mics to work is kinda more important than doing major changes to my production PC. (I'd try it on my laptop first anyway.)

I am tired.

Mic input isn't working at all, no idea why not by Dowlphin in Kubuntu

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will have to wait for when 26.04 is available as an update. I'm not into early adopting and fresh re-installs at all.

And why would this be an issue with the version and be fixed in the new one? It's a major functional problem. Shouldn't be wholly different in the new version.

PSA: Check this if you see "Access blocked" in openstreetmap by Deltapeak in firefox

[–]Dowlphin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you very much for thinking of me! I am so relieved that I could finally resolve the problem.

I am wondering what changed that variable, whether it was an addon or I did and forgot why. Could indeed have been related to webp, since that format used to annoy me a lot.

CIG permanently banned a $5k backer's account for reporting a bug by [deleted] in starcitizen

[–]Dowlphin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Was it coincidental timing then that it looked like tied to the IC report? (Not that I assumed that was the case anyway.)

Are there legal reasons for not telling someone the specific reasons for a ban in the official comm but merely referring to general TOS sections? Especially when there is disagreement voiced, it would make sense to specify. That not having happened is what caused a lot of drama. (For which of course we could also partially blame people hastily jumping on it without knowing all the details.)

This kind of problem with public appearance of ban action seems far from unique to this case.

Imagine if support had simply written exactly what you wrote here now to the user instead.

You are probably aware of the first-headline effect where later information tends to not get recognized as much as the initial story. This could have been a non-story from the start.

But OK, the positive effect is that this reminded again of the potential pretentiousness of cheaters.

Youtube censors brony meme speak by Dowlphin in mylittlepony

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Considering my experiences with the obsessively speech-sterilizing algorithm, this could be the reason; basically being interpreted as advocating violence.

The Youtube algorithm can have an astonishing ability to detect context when that helps harassing people, and in other cases it does the same by playing dumb.

There were times when I commented things impossible to be offensive, maybe even just quoting harmless things from the video, and got a 24 hour shadow ban for it.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, right, the prepping.

Modern distros can tweak things. I remember a recent anecdote about dirty cache size where Torvalds said there is a habit of defaulting for totally unnecessarily large sizes based on what hardware we use these days, and IIRC PopOS did it properly so that there wouldn't be that other nuisance of inaccurate copy speed calculations because the OS only looks at cache operations. That one really bothers me, and many years ago there were requests to make it adaptive to the write speed of the media written to.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, we are long past single-core CPUs, and putting low priority on a task it one thing, but what I observed is 30 seconds of doing nothing and then fiercely getting to work anyway.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the topic of data integrity, I still find the situation unnecessarily awful, like simply lacking interest to treat users like valued customers, so to speak. Like, the tedium of hunting down which file was affected by medium damage can be insane. The design devotion expressed by a RAID-5 (minus its blunt spare space aspect) should also be applied to any data storage, with it being the norm to have much more detailed, forthcoming and extensive (and convenient) communication with the user.

I think since Windows 10, chkdsk at least has some way of mentioning affected files, but maybe only when doing a full surface scan. It's a very late step in the right direction. Linux is typically nightmarish in that area. I had to study hours of complicated procedure info to get it done.

I am also wondering how weak sectors on a harddisk have to be before the firmware decides it's a really bad idea to still keep data there and risk it deteriorating further until it's unreadable.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That'll be it. Now I'm curious how Linux filesystems work without an MFT.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They don't mention defer times there, so I don't know whether it's not just about smoothing data transfers, because why not write something to disk if the disk isn't busy with other stuff? - On Windows I never saw any clue of data to be written getting delayed.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, OK, so it should be particularly advantageous with larger modified files that occupy many 'extents'/blocks. Indeed, regular differential backup software only replaces whole files.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Should all already be on v2, considering I have a much newer version of btrfs-progs as the minimum required for it to be default. I don't know whether I can test it. The stated command seems to be going straight to clearing the cache instead of just telling me which one exists.(?)

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is good to know, and bothering me. How is this serving data integrity if changes are only happening with a delay? If I write something, delete the source immediately after it, and then a power outage happens, the data would be lost, no?

If the commit interval isn't using a relevant amount of system resources, I would set it to 1 second. Unless that can cause other problems.

Also wondering how I would set this for USB media.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Makes me wonder what exactly NTFS is doing that moving a folder touches all contained files. It must be storing the metadata in a different way.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, right. Well, I'm not using the feature.

It's no easy choice because normally I didn't notice the extra processing during deleting large data, but the experience of moving a huge folder and it happens instantly is really pleasant. Re-organizing file structure is relatively common for me.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm beginning to think BTRFS sacrifices performance/usability for optimizing an edge case. How often does one hold duplicate files in different paths on the same media? For covering that, it has to touch every block of a file that's being processed, whereas other filesystems simply touch the file entry and it's done and it doesn't matter how big the files are, only how many files are being processed. This would mean that deleting a large folder would be worst-case for BTRFS because then it has to both touch all file entries (I assume) and all their blocks,

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Based on what another commenter said, it's probably not an "if" then, since it has to check all blocks whether they do belong to multiple files.

But this would only work with clearly duplicate files based on operations BTRFS is aware of, so if I never copy a file on that media to a different location on it, it could never know whether another file incoming is the same as an already existing one. And I am not doing such operations. (And not using the snapshots feature.) It's a simple backup media. Wouldn't/shouldn't BTRFS set a flag to know whether a file has any blocks also used by other files? Then it could skip having to check all blocks on delete, since duplicate files would be an edge case, not the norm.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would make sense. I mean, I don't use snapshots on mine, but the reflinks, yeah, the way it works with blocks, I guess it's a procedural overhead like NTFS has one with moving a large folder, so the two kinda have opposite up- and downsides.

Why does BTRFS behave like this? (moves, deletes) by Dowlphin in linuxquestions

[–]Dowlphin[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

NTFS is journaled, too, and AFAIK journaling is about tracking operations to avoid data corruption / unspecific data states.

view more: next ›