>Mapping = CreateFileMappingW(Handle, 0, PAGE_READWRITE, 0, FileSize, 0); So it is more a "case" not handled by dokan rather that all memory mapped not handled ? Is this made in purpose just to remove dokan from the…
I agree. It would even be more interesting or reliable if the benchmark could compare a MEMFS made by dokan author and not Winfsp author like here.
You say in your bench that Dokan support does not support memory mapped files but it does as I can see with fsx (memory mapped read/write enabled) running on their CI…
You should better say that your userland FS is fast with WinFSP that with Dokan https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13129215
You should better say that YOUR MEMFS implementation is better on Winfsp that YOUR MEMFS implementation on Dokan. This is even not a far comparison.
>Mapping = CreateFileMappingW(Handle, 0, PAGE_READWRITE, 0, FileSize, 0); So it is more a "case" not handled by dokan rather that all memory mapped not handled ? Is this made in purpose just to remove dokan from the…
I agree. It would even be more interesting or reliable if the benchmark could compare a MEMFS made by dokan author and not Winfsp author like here.
You say in your bench that Dokan support does not support memory mapped files but it does as I can see with fsx (memory mapped read/write enabled) running on their CI…
You should better say that your userland FS is fast with WinFSP that with Dokan https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13129215
You should better say that YOUR MEMFS implementation is better on Winfsp that YOUR MEMFS implementation on Dokan. This is even not a far comparison.