Why not have X-Windows store the COMPRESSED image?
Posted Jun 28, 2006 20:16 UTC (Wed) by dwheeler
Parent article: Interview: Jim Gettys (Part I)
One question, maybe the interviewer can ask Gettys - why not just
have X-Windows store the COMPRESSED image? He notes that "many applications seem to think that storing pixmaps in the X server (and often forgetting about them entirely) is a good strategy, whereas retransmitting or repainting the pixmap may be both faster and use less memory.", and he mentions Federico Mena-Quintera's work. But if they're stored in the client, and sent each time to X-Windows, you now have to at least resend... and X-Windows isn't always local; over a mesh in particular you DON'T want the image retransmitted each time. If you have to store it anyway, why not have X-Windows store compressed, not uncompressed images? Indeed, if X-Windows could accept common compressed formats, and recompress when it feels like it, it could have all the memory benefits he notes...!
to post comments)