Notices by Wolf480pl (wolf480pl@mstdn.io), page 14

$ git annex wanted greed anything

@piggo I think that's a better way to name it than md5 of its DNA...

@novenary @mikoto @lispi314
In an LTT video, a guy from Framework said that when they asked AMD about LPCAMM, AMD ran a lot of simulations and concluded that the 256-bit memory bus is too wide for that to work. I don't remember if signal integrity was mentioned, but I'd expect that's what would cause the problem.

@novenary @mikoto @lispi314
And regarding upgradability - where I live, 128 GB of cheapest DDR5 SODIMM costs as much as a Radeon RX 6700. So I think with upgradable RAM, ir makes sense to buy less initially.

But if I could get 128GB of soldered DDR5 for the price of 32GB SODIMM, I'd happily go with the soldered RAM

@novenary @mikoto @lispi314
> for repair, I don't really see anything wrong with leaving that up to specialists

Except that causes a lot of downtime. Unless you have a whole spare computer.

@lanodan @xian @mikoto @novenary IIRC the latest gen of AMD GPUs has cache in separate chiplets around the main GPU die....

@xian @mikoto @novenary Tarkov :P

@mikoto @xian @novenary
really? Cities Skylines also requires an X3D CPU?

@mikoto @xian @novenary
Most games do.
The thing with Tarkov is that, allegedly, it has huge frame latency spikes on anything that doesn't have 96MB of L3 cache :D

@mikoto @novenary it's not instead of solder, it's in addition to solder. One more connection point, which - depending on how precisely it's made and how good a contact there is - might cause signal reflections. AFAIU that might result in some higher speeds not working.

@mikoto @novenary
> FBDIMM

hehe reminds me of the goo^W old PowerEdge 1950

@mikoto I wonder if they could've used LPCAMM2 memory...

@lanodan @quad @mikoto @Chloe @izzy
no I mean for normies with a win10

@mikoto @quad @Chloe @izzy
Because USB mass storage exposes a block device, and it's quite difficult to have a shared block device with a filesystem that is being simultaneously mounted and being written to by two OSes.

It's possible - GFS2, and OCFS2 are two examples that come to my mind - but I haven't heard of anyone doing that with FAT, let alone an unmodified implementation of FAT that comes with most operating systems

@mikoto @quad @Chloe @izzy
unless you could somehow present to the host a simulated FAT that is synthesized on-the-fly from the files on your mounted filesystem 🤔

@mikoto @quad @Chloe @izzy
I'm afraid the client's cache may get in the way... but maybe you could do some sort of snapshot or MVCC, where once the client read some file or directory, any future modification on the server won't be visible to that client?

@mikoto @quad @Chloe @izzy yeah...

@mikoto @quad @Chloe @izzy
and commit on unplug

@mikoto @quad @Chloe @izzy
or maybe not, maybe commit after every modification - propagation from client to server shouldn't be a big issue...

@mikoto @quad @Chloe @izzy
I think NFS has a more cooperative client. IIRC it has some form of locking.