| |||||||||||||
Wayland performanceWayland performancePosted Apr 17, 2012 19:56 UTC (Tue) by renox (subscriber, #23785)In reply to: Wayland performance by rvfh Parent article: LFCS 2012: X and Wayland
Thanks for the indication of the paragraph, I think what he's talking about is that Weston integrates the window manager (well a part), the display server and the compositor so there will be less IPC so it's more efficient from this point of view, AFAIK nothing prevents an X server to be implemented in the same way if this is really a big performance improvement..
(Log in to post comments)
Wayland performance Posted Apr 17, 2012 20:28 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
It means getting rid of X window manager as a separate entity and embedding it into the X-server process.
At which point you might start thinking that it's easier to throw away X-server completely out of your core and instead relegate it to the status of ordinary application. That's what Wayland does.
|
|||||||||||||