GNOME 3.26: Wayland vs. X.Org Performance - Boot Times, Power Use, Memory Use & Gaming

[smitty3268]

And yet, after all this time, Wayland still doesn't compare favorably to this "dead end".

If X was easy to replace, it would have been done 20 years ago because that's how long it's sucked. Just because something is bad doesn't mean it's easy to fix. That's the whole problem, in fact.

[edoantonioco]

Some don't need X, Xonotic for example.

I can play most of my games on xwayland on the nvidia card, but most of them probably use sdl2 so thats why they work. Its good to have a clue about why they work.

[sheldonl]

Are you talking about xdmcp? If so then let me remind you that thing horribly slow. Even on a gigabit ethernet you can literally watch it draw out elements one at a time. It super sucks.

Umm... I've used XDM/XDMCP extensively in the past for setting up thin clients that boot and run off of a central server. It works just fine, no issues with horribly slow. We ran multiple ASIC hardware designers off of such systems even as far back in the 90's on 100Mb and didn't have any issues. How are we going to do similar stuff is Wayland? Also, isn't the wayland protocol XML? Won't *that* be horribly slow to parse compared to a binary protocol like X uses?

[smitty3268]

Umm... I've used XDM/XDMCP extensively in the past for setting up thin clients that boot and run off of a central server. It works just fine, no issues with horribly slow. We ran multiple ASIC hardware designers off of such systems even as far back in the 90's on 100Mb and didn't have any issues. How are we going to do similar stuff is Wayland? Also, isn't the wayland protocol XML? Won't *that* be horribly slow to parse compared to a binary protocol like X uses?

The wayland protocol is only *described* by xml, it doesn't use it. Anything passed over a connection would be binary, and also not directly part of wayland but rather an extension or application on top of it.

X runs ok over a LAN, but it shows lots of problems if you try to run it over the internet.

[leipero]

Yep, except I obviously have the old style settings menu becouse I'm just at GNOME 3.24. The monitor really is set to 120hz which I can confirm by checking the monitor OSD. I suspect it's just the mouse pointer which isn't refreshing fast enough which makes it feel as if the monitor was set to 60hz, even though it isn't.



I am aware of this bug report. I assume it's not yet fixed and hope that it will be fixed before Ubuntu 18.04.

You can force mutter to work at desired FPS by global environement value (for your example):
CLUTTER_DEFAULT_FPS=120

I had basically same problems you listed in previous post, mouse, FPS etc., FPS issue even affects wine gaming (at least on gallium nine), where game would report "normal FPS" (anywhere between 100-250 FPS for example), but it would look very stuttery if above env. value is not set to desired FPS coresponding to actual refresh rate.

[RussianNeuroMancer]

But more seriously, you've ask if there is a way to implement it and the article suggests there is. VNC is an example for it. It may only not be exactly what you're looking for, but there is work on an API for it.

This API allow only whole desktop sharing, which is completely different paradigm.

[JonathanM]

And yet, after all this time, Wayland still doesn't compare favorably to this "dead end".

That something is a dead end does not mean that it has a issue free replacement, it just means that you shouldn't continue depending on it but transition to something that doesn't have its flaws. (The main problems currently are caused by issues with the implementations.)

[profoundWHALE]

I don't need it. I already got it.

then stop complaining. First you say, "Oh, but it doesn't have this feature so it's definitely bad." Then people show you that it's actually replaced by something else and you say "I don't need it cause I already have it."

I get why you cannot make a good sales pitch. You simply don't have anything to show. If you cannot get that fixed, then you're dead from the start.

What the heck are you talking about? Now you want devs to hire marketing teams to 'sell' Wayland? Or are you saying that "Without x feature, Wayland is dead from the start." because both are dumb, but I'd like to know which dumb thing you meant so I can give you proper response.

[sdack]

This API allow only whole desktop sharing, which is completely different paradigm.

You've asked, "Is there a way to implement this with Wayland in mind?"

Now I need to ask, do you want to implement this yourself or do you rather expect somebody else to implement this for you?

So to your question, "Is there a way to implement this with Wayland in mind?" is the answer still yes. You can take the existing code and make your own modification and implement it in anyway you want.

If your question is, "Is there a way for somebody to implement this for me and exactly the way I need it?" then I don't know the answer. You'll have to find somebody willing to do this for you and likely discuss a form of payment.

[sdack]

then stop complaining. First you say, "Oh, but it doesn't have this feature so it's definitely bad." Then people show you that it's actually replaced by something else and you say "I don't need it cause I already have it."



What the heck are you talking about? Now you want devs to hire marketing teams to 'sell' Wayland? Or are you saying that "Without x feature, Wayland is dead from the start." because both are dumb, but I'd like to know which dumb thing you meant so I can give you proper response.

I'm not complaining. I'm saying I'm not sold on it. Calm down now.