Hi, you guys, welcome back to what was supposed to be a first impression Friday of an indie pattern company, which I have not done in so long, but kind of after getting in the groove of things with the big four, releasing so many new patterns over the past month and a half or so, I was kind of, you know, feeling inspired to start doing them more regularly, which means I have to do indie company patterns. If you're following on Instagram, then you know that I filmed an entire hour in 20 minute long video, first impression review with no audio, like literally none. There it would be like in this blue section here. So it's fine. It's, it's fine. We're just going to do a second impression. And I'll probably go through them a little bit faster than I normally do, but that's okay. There's lots of patterns here and I still have lots to say. So without further ado, today we are reviewing so different. She has a lot of really great info on her, like about so different page. The designer's name is Laura and she started out designing fabric, made her way into blogging with a range of free simple one size patterns and then branched out into multi size paper patterns, which is what we are going to look at today. She offers a ton of different events. I think she's in the Northern England area. Yeah, Yorkshire countryside. Here's some info on her fabric designs, equally beautiful. We'll talk about that a little bit as we go as well. And yeah, you can just learn a lot about her through this little about page. These are always so fascinating when it comes to indie patterns because everybody has such a vast background. But if you want to shop her fabric to do that here, textiles and tipples is a art fair that's also in her events along with some sewing retreats, yada, yada, yada. Okay, so the patterns. I am going to go through each one, but I might have more to say about one than the other depending on my second impression of it. I do want to talk about the size chart a little bit. Since she is in England, obviously, she uses UK sizes and most of her stuff is in all of her stuff is in centimeters. The only mention of inches in this entire website is right here. Each listing has finished garment measurements, but they're only in centimeters. So you'd have to convert those for yourself, use your pass fit workbook, and determine what ease makes sense for you there. But I will not be able to speak on that throughout this video. Just know that she does have US sizes four to 26, which body measurement size is a hip of 36 ish to 57 and a half. And when I pulled you guys asking about like what the size inclusivity really mean, like what numbers should I be looking for a 60 inch hip was what you guys were asking for. So this is not that, but it is close. Maybe one more size and she would be she would be the most inclusive of all the inclusiveness, right? Okay, so that's what I have to say about sizing. I am going to leave this up in case I need to refer back to it, but I don't think I am. That's pretty much all there is to say about that. Oh, actually one more thing, some of them do come in all the sizes in one pattern. Others of them have them broken down into like what would be off on numeric sizing, but she doesn't use, she doesn't use letters, she still uses numbers, but it's a range eight to 10, 12 to 14, you know, so on and so forth. So, okay, now we'll look at the patterns. So she has her patterns broken down into like different kinds of, I don't know, themes. So there's a new retro. There's basics. There's layering one. So we'll see those as we go. They're usually indicated right here, but this is the new retro, which kind of leans into the 70s. As you can see, it is a, this is a true wrap dress. It has the option of this blouson sleeve and this really pretty like flouncy ruffle thing. And then it also comes, you can do it without the sleeve and it would be like a, kind of like a cap sleeve situation. And she does offer in her listings a little description of what you're getting. Very good description. I never was wanting more information. Suggested fabrics were great. Again, I always love when they include like a generalized description of the fabric in addition to the specific substrates. Like for this one, it would be lightweight woven with drape or something like that to help you kind of make sense of what all of these specific ones mean, but also like when you're in the store, if you don't see those words, you can still kind of get an idea of you're in the right range or not. Then there's fabric requirements. And then she has a section on notions and this is all you're going to see in each listing for finished garment measurements. So again, you do have to convert to centimeters on your own or convert to inches from centimeters on your own. But that's how her listings are set up. Most of the patterns are 12 pounds, which these days would equate to about $12 for the PDF. There are some that were like in the eight pound $8 range for them, like more basic designs. But that's the Darjeeling frock. In the quick make section, I did think this was really interesting that she has all of these kind of separated. And from what I remember, they all had a timeframe up to two and a half hours, which I think is a really cool way to kind of list your patterns like based on time. I guess I never really thought of that before because I don't, I'm not short on time to so. But if I were, like if I were needing a new top for tonight, I guess, and I know I've only got a few hours, like I know I could, I know I could come to so different, go to the basic section, download it, tape it together really quickly and sew it up in two and a half hours. I mean, you could definitely do this in an afternoon. So I thought that was really cool. You'll notice that the designs are on the more basic side, but I mean, that's okay. This one and a lot of the others you'll see really highlight print mixing, color blocking, and leaning into that kind of pieced look. So this one, as you can see here is meant to be color blocked. This one I felt like for me was a little bit long. A lot of her patterns I found myself saying were more ideal for Apple shapes, which I don't say that very often. Mostly someone patterns will highlight, you know, a hourglass or a pair. But I feel like a lot of these patterns would be good for you Apple shaped women. If you do have a curbier bottom, you know, as well as I do, this is not going to be flattering on us. The way I get around that and still make patterns that I love is I just shorten it. So instead of it hitting at the, it's a high low hem. So instead of the front hitting, you know, at the crotch line, I move it all the way up to like my natural waist and then wherever the gray falls for the back is where it falls. And that tends to be like a lot more flattering showing that I do have a waist in there somewhere. So yeah, I thought this one was fun and cute. Again, if you just look at the line drawing, right, and you're not looking at the fabrication of it all, it is still a pretty basic top with a center front seam and a back yoke. But she takes the time to kind of think it through for you. How can you make this unique? Absolutely. You can make this out of all one fabric, or you can do it this way. You can also do plays on stripes, plays on texture, all of those things. So another quick make, I'm not going to go into this one. It's just a batwing top. We've seen these a thousand times. And you'll see the quick makes to end up being a little bit cheaper. These are the $8.50 ones.  There was also a basic boxy top right here. So boxy top with the darts, sleeve on sleeve off. There was a raglan one right here, boxy raglan. This one has like a little curved hem to it as well. So lots of great options. If you if you like something that's a little bit oversized, not super fitted, I think you'll be really happy with her basics collection. Everything else, as I started to go through it, I realized had a bit of a artsy flair to it. Okay, so it's not hippie necessarily. It's not boho. It's very like artsy. And there are some fun details that are included. This one, the chamomile calf tan, also part of the new retro collection, I thought was really cool, mostly because of the sleeve. But it does also have this under bus seam with this deep v neckline, which I also thought was really beautiful. But you can see how the sleeve comes together here. And then here are the different links, you can do tunic, dress or calf tan. I prefer the midi length myself. This starts to feel a little bit like a, I don't know, like oversized plus tunic length. It's just like, it's a little frumpy for my taste. But I do feel like the longer version feels more elevated, feels more elegant. And you could add a little bit of shaping in there if you wanted. You could work out some fisheye darts or, you know, taking the side seams a little bit. I think you could do some things to make it, you know, a little more fitted if that's what you chose to do. Then next up we had this artist smock. There's an artist smock. There's a fisherman's smock. And there's like a another artist type dress that has they all have this neckline, which I think is so chic and elegant, especially in this kind of fabrication.  But it's very simple, right?  The darts are in a bit of a different place. But other than that, you just add this color to it and you are good to go. Now, one thing I did notice a lot of her photos left a lot to be desired. Okay. So a lot of them just have this situation, this background on and they're on this dress form. This dress form is not like one of those that is supposed to resemble a human body at all. It's basically like a long padded hanger with boobs. There's like no shape to it anywhere else. And the shoulders are really narrow. So a lot of her clothes don't fit this dress form. And so it was really hard for me to assess fit on it because like this is not where a normal shoulder ends. This neckline, how big is it? I can't tell in relation to this super small shoulder. And then same thing with the bust darts. I don't know how on a human being it would fit because this is just not proportional, this dress form. It's not, when you look at it without clothes on, it doesn't even really look like a human. So it was hard for me to assess fit. And then on top of that, I couldn't really assess ease because we don't have the finish garment measurements in inches for me. So we're kind of going a little bit, going in a little bit blind. We'd have to sew up one of these to get an idea of how it is drafted for our particular bodies. But you know what? You have to do that for the most part anyways. Even if I am giving you lots of information on fit, you still can't just rely on what I'm saying and how it looks like on a fit model or on a model model. You still kind of have to go into it with a little bit of expectation is that we're going to have to do some things on our own here. So here's another example of the print mixing color blocking situation. I thought this one was really cool. The caveat to this one is because these seams are on such a diagonal, you have to be super, super, super aware of your fabrication. It has to be super tightly woven, nothing loosely woven by any stretch of the means. And you have to be careful with the weight of it. The more lighter weight you go, the harder it is to sew. It runs. And you can see that one here. So this is like kind of a drapery or fabric. You can see whatever is happening here is a little bit funky and then you're getting lots of puckering here. Probably not like anything that a normal person will notice, but those of us who sew, that would be really frustrating to me if I were getting all those puckers. But as you get into a heavier weight fabric, the puckers start to go away more and more. And when you get into something that's like, you know, suiting something that's like a good, you know, tightly woven cotton or something like that, you can achieve really, really beautiful results. It is a very interesting design, just a little bit harder to execute really perfectly just by looking at it. You wouldn't think it'd be that hard, but it kind of, it kind of is. She also does a lot of really fun stuff with darts. So she obviously has a dart here, but the dirt on the other side was made into this cut. And so you'll see that happening kind of a bunch. She like, you know, turns and rotates her darts into style lines, which I think is really fun and unique. This one was super cute. Obviously, you know, I love this one. I'm a frill girl through and through.  This one has two options. You can either add the sleeve or leave it without. I think that I like the sleeved option better just for the volume. You know, like this is already a very oversized dress and the volume of it just really, I don't know more, just give me more. And then pocketing for her patterns is really interesting too. So they're almost always hidden into a really inconspicuous seam. And this one happens to be the center front panel. So that one I thought was really cute too. Here is the everyday chic dress. This is the first time I noticed some fit issues was this one. So if you do get a photo on her website, most of the time it's this one like in a studio with light coming in from one side, shaded on the other side. It is very, it's pretty, I get that, but it's hard to see. Sometimes we got this one, which is still has the light coming from the side, but it's not as dramatic. And then other times you'll see she has like people who have made this like home so it's like us and they take their photos wherever they take them. So this was a really good example of like seeing it in on many different bodies and in different kinds of light that made it a little bit easier for me to make heads or tails of what was going on fit wise. And the thing that I noticed here mostly is with the raglan sleeve. So it does seem like there's obviously lots of pulling here and then same thing on hers. And then this one had just like a ton of volume under it, but hers looks really good. Of course, I don't know what fabric she used. But if we're getting, you know, four out of the five people with a fit issue at one area, you can basically assume that something is off with that greeting. I think what's happened is it's too narrow through here or there's not enough shaping on that top seam. I'm not entirely sure what it is. I wouldn't be able to tell without looking at it, but this was the first time where I was like, Oh, that actually doesn't look right. So and plus this design to kind of left me feeling like a little bit meh. If it were in the basics collection, I think I would be a little bit more forgiving, but it's not. I guess I don't see it as an everyday dress. I also don't see it as chic. It's feeling a little just kind of sad. We had this jacket, which I had high hopes for initially, but the execution on the model is really not great. Hers was fabulous and I don't know who Tara is. I don't know if she has a blog or what, but Tara's style is so freaking cool. She wears a lot of like combat boots with like flowy stuff. And that is just like, I don't know, so bad a to me. Her execution of the sewing was a lot better. So this gave me higher hopes for it, but I think all the jackets on so different, none of them zip or button or have any closures at all. They're all just plain like sewn closed on the center front. So for this one, I was thinking it to me would make a better blouse. I think that would get more wear out of it. If it were a blouse, then this, you know, like cotton overcoat thing that just felt kind of weird to me.  But if you're using something crisp like Tara did, then it executions a lot better. I think it looks better, you know, being more voluminous anyways, because of, you know, all these fun gathers and everything. And then things started to get really good through here. So this Fleetwood frock I'm obsessed with. What was cool about it, and you can see in this line drawing is that the straps are like part of the bodice. How did she phrase it? She was much better integrated straps. So they aren't sewn into the facing on the front. The bodice pattern piece includes the strap. And then on the back, they're sewn into the facing in the back. It's not the coolest. I just thought that I've never seen anything like that. And these days I'm just dying for like a flowy, maxi, simple square neck dress. This one does have the pocketing with the little like, like banded detail on the pocket. I really loved this one a lot, a lot. It might be the fabric too. I really liked that fabric. But I thought that, yeah, the design of the straps was just really unique and interesting. This one did have a close, a close, what is it called? Closures? A zipper, a seven inch nylon zipper. I think it's on the side. So some of her stuff is pull-on, like these next two are both pull-on. This is the fisherman's smock that I brought up when I was talking about the artist's smock. You can see they're very, very similar. They just have, this one has this, you know, different kind of pocket and the gather is in a different place. This one I thought would be really cool as a dress. I don't know. It just feels like I don't, wouldn't go fishing in that, but that's just me, I guess. Obviously, you know, wearing it over leggings or something like that would be like super cool too. The way that this one was designed though is that this is all one piece. It's like a grown-on pocket, I guess. So imagine this dress long and then you flip this right sides together and stitch down your pocket. So this is actually the underside of the fabric. I felt like that was a little bit of a, I don't know, sloppier way to do it. And also who wants to see the wrong side of their fabric and the wrong side of this hem? I don't, there's a lot of things with it that I was like, that doesn't make very much sense. So I would have just cut it off and then sewn them right sides together the normal way, you know, and make, and you can still achieve these huge pockets on the hem. Just with one more cut and one more, you know, zip around your sewing machine. But I did think it was kind of cool. I don't know. I just feel also is this just going to catch lots of junk and trash? I feel like that's just like things would just naturally fall in there. Yeah, not even my own. Like people that are walking past on the streets are just like, the VT basic box CT. Okay, the sunrise jacket. I was thinking about this this morning actually. So you know that if you've spent a day not looking at the patterns, and then you're still thinking about one or some of them, you know that it's, it's a good one. So this one takes a simple denim, you know, open front jacket with bias binding on all the edges. And then you add in this quilted and I'm using air quotes, but quilted panel to create a gigantic pocket. She has this sunrise sun starburst design sunburst design there and also on the sleeve. The sleeve feels a little bit artsy to me like too much artsy.  Oh, name's not coming to me. But just something like that you could do your own quilt design that isn't even these things.  I just thought it was like a, I don't know, just gave me lots of inspiration for different ways that you could sew this up and make it super cool. Here it is from the front. I just think it's really interesting. I don't know. Maybe even like adding a little tie right here just to give you the option of closing it if you want. But yeah, I thought this one was really, really neat. I would probably leave it off the sleeve myself. But that felt a little bit like 1970s rock star band guy, right? Like, I don't know. That felt a little, I don't know, just took it a little bit over the top for me. Okay, here's the boxy rag when we talked about another great basic. This panel tee and panel dress gave me a lot of strife. This on her, the way it's styled and everything.  And I'd be growing up, you know, the side of our brick building, brick house, right? The chimney's going the whole nine yards. This one was getting me like 2010, you know, where you're color blocking with the solids. We all did it. We all did it. But then I saw this one and I was like, wait a minute. That actually looks super expensive and super chic. So my final thought on this one was monochromatic. Keep it all the same color with different textures. So you can see they use like a solid, I don't know if this is silk or batiste or wet, but like a solid something here. This one has this little raised texture on it. And then this one is a solid, but like a little bit shine to it. I thought that that was the best way to make this look its best versus any of these other options. The line drawing I like well enough, you know, again, interesting style lines. But I just thought that this looked very, very elevated and chic. I would absolutely wear this in a heartbeat. Next up, this ripple dress. I mean, I know we've seen a million different versions of these, but you just can't go wrong, right? The gingham and then this one they use like smaller gingham in the back.  And then when you do, it just feels like it's still so natural. I did think that this was a little bit long on her waist. I think it's supposed to hit at the natural way. So her got a little bit long, but that's okay. That's an easy enough adjustment from here. But yeah, and I also was commenting too about how this is just the boxy top. Where'd she go? This is just the boxy top with a gathered skirt on the bottom. So instead of buying this one for $8.50, buy this one for $12 and then and then don't add the skirt and hem the top when you want the top and add the skirt when you want the dress. That way too, you'll also get the notched collar design versus the just plain rounded design. Okay, this would another color block, print block situation. This one was super cool, I thought.  And this scene, this one here is going underneath her bust beautifully. This is another example of where the dart on the other side was incorporated into a scene. There's only one pocket on this dress, but you could obviously easily add that to the other side, just kind of rinse and repeat. But yeah, that was pretty inspirational for like using up a bunch of different dinoms. This jacket, okay, we start getting into this area of the collection where everything is way too big for the model. I don't know what happened or why, but you can see on the line drawing of this biker jacket, Cardi, it's closed on the bottom. But for her, it's like wide open. So that left me feeling a little bit kind of sad because I do like the look of this a lot. But you can just tell like even through here, it's way too big and it's just like this neckline is super open. And then this I just didn't care for that at all. I would never wear it like that. I would just keep it closed the whole time. But obviously this is like, I don't know, two, three sizes too big for her. And I want to see it, I want to see it the way it's supposed to fit. I don't know if they were trying to accommodate a fuller bust and then got lazy and didn't want to do the full bust adjustment or maybe the model that they made this for couldn't show up that day. I don't know what happened, but I want to see that one on somebody where it fits them properly. This one again was a little bit confusing fit wise. The design is really cute and interesting. But I couldn't tell where these darts are supposed to stop. Is it supposed to be an underbust situation like it is for her? Or is it supposed to be at the high bus like it is for her? I really couldn't tell what the intention was. I'm not sure that you're supposed to, but hopefully maybe somewhere in the instructions or on the pattern pieces themselves, it indicates where the bust line is. And that's how you can tell if they're in the right place. I just couldn't tell if it was supposed to be more of like a fitted bust that flares open from the, you know, high waist down. Or like I couldn't really tell. I guess that makes the most sense, right? But we're getting better at the raglan. Granted, she is leaning against the table here, but even her raglan is a little bit better. Still not perfect, but we're getting somewhere with it. Same thing with this one here. Where does this little thing end? And then I was also lamenting on like bubble hem. So we're about to see, I think, five or so different iterations of a bubble hem. They are not for me as a pear shape. They just accentuate all the, my big butt, and I don't want that to be extenuated. But I think you can easily take this band off and just extend this down into more of an A-line, and you'd have an interesting dress. It would look a lot like this one, if I'm being honest. These two things aren't super different. The sleeve is, and I guess you get one plate instead of three, but I mean it wasn't really like they had to go back to the drawing board completely on this one. The gambit collection is interesting, so this was obviously inspired by the Queen's Gambit, the TV show about the woman chess champion. But we got another batwing top, which we kind of already had. And then in all the gambit photos, you can't really see the garment very well. She's sitting down a lot of times, or like positioned in a funky way. I'll show you more. This Riva jacket, there's a better version of it. So if you like the idea of the Riva jacket, keep that in mind. I'll be bringing it up again, but it was just confusing to me because it says it's unlined, but there's clearly a lining here. Then yeah, I just wasn't feeling how it was styled in either situation. More like this, but I just couldn't picture myself wearing it. Like how would I wear this? I did think it was neat for like a lounge around the house robe and something like lightweight. Then we have the, is this the duo top? Another basic quick make. It's a take on the boxy tops we've seen so far, but this one has this long grown on sleeve yoke panel thing all in one. So fuller busted gals, just be careful of these that can accentuate your bust a lot. This one, albeit way too big on the first model, look at it on her. I mean, very, very sixties, right? Like almost costuming the way that it's done this way, but then too big, right? I'll show you in a second another area that's too big on her for sure. And then here it felt like something's off, right? It feels too close fitted here, too long here, too big here. Like I don't know what happened, but if you look at the line drawing and how it's supposed to fit, of course you guys know I love fisheye darts. So that was included. I just don't know how you would make this without it looking either like you want it at a state sale or whatever this is. Like this doesn't look right to me either. Maybe it's the colors and the tights and the boots and the hair. Maybe that has something to do with it. I don't know. Like I want to like it a lot, but I'm just feeling a little bit like again, how do I execute this where it's giving its inspiration, but not so much. There's a balance there, right? Okay, so here's another bubble hem. For whatever reason, this one I fell in love with. I just, I don't know if it's, I don't know. And hers is pretty, but look at this one. I mean, maybe it's the background. Maybe it's the wind blowing through her hair. It's Tara again with her combat boots, which I'm obsessed with. She just looks so free and cool and like unbothered. That is what I'm here for. Yeah, so I ended up really, really falling for this one. I don't know if the bubble at the ankle does the same thing as the bubble at the knee or higher. It doesn't look like it on either one of them. I wouldn't even know that there was really a bubble hem there.  So yeah, I don't know. This one's unique and different to me. We don't see a lot of bubble hems anymore, but these pictures really sold me on it for sure. Here is a long line jacket. This is probably one of the more shaker things that we see from so different. Very elegant. This one was very well made. A little bit on the basic side. Again, it does have no closures. So you can see that here. Look at this stunning fabric and they matched it all up and everything really well executed.  We do see a little bit repeated. Again with the raglan waist seam, big deep pocket, fully lined. This one was yeah, really elegant and pretty. Good simple jacket. Here's another gambit tee. Again, it's just a short sleeve batwing with these details sewn in. She's sitting the whole time. I can't tell how long it is. I can't tell anything about the fit. This one has a knit top and woven skirt, which I remember doing that and not liking it for some reason. One of the other models, did it all in one fabric? Yeah, this one here, which obviously I like a whole lot more. So I don't know. I think maybe just do this out of all knit and just know that the option is there for the woven. Because I like this one a lot more than this one. And I don't think it's the color or the print mixing. I think it's just, well, maybe that is exactly what it is. I don't know. I don't think it's the type of fabric, like woven knit that matters here. I don't think you can make the bodice out of a woven though. It's very close fitting, right? So you'd have to size up in the bodice, I think, if you wanted to do that. This one was cool. They just did this girl wrong on choosing this picture. I get they were having fun in the studio and whatever, but this is just not, no. It's fun, right? I get it. Personality is a hundred, but the poor girl with her hair just in an upside down, in a W shape. But the concept of this garment is really neat. Tank dress or tank top underneath with a very oversized slouchy thin sweater knit on top. I think I would wear something like this a lot. You'd have to find the exact right perfect fabrics. This dress part needs to be lots of stretch, lots of recovery, something a little bit thicker, like a midweight rib knit or something like that. And then this has to be almost like a tissue knit so that you get the drape that you're looking for. I also thought maybe some kind of like sheer something, but just be careful because that can look a little bit dated or I don't know, not cute. So picking up the fabrics at the same time for this one would be really critical. And then I would also leave off the pockets just because I can't do floppy pockets, especially in a knit garment. But I think the concept is there. The concept is really cool. And again, you know, I play around with the proportions. It's again, I don't know if it's too big on her or what, but it feels a little long in both, on both pieces. I would want to shorten this one to like high waist. And this can say the same. This just the proportions need to be adjusted on this part, I think. Yeah, this needs to be short no matter what. And then I think this can be whatever length you want it to be. But I did think it was cool and unique. So this is just an apron, you know, the ones that cross in the back like that.  Good little gift that you can make. Nothing revolutionary about the design though, we've seen that a thousand times. This is the layering section. They put this dress over pants, which is a bold move. But I, you know, I don't necessarily love that. But, and it's even Tara, my girl who I feel like I love everything she wears. She does have her combat boots on still, which makes me happy. But yeah, this dress with the frill by itself is very mod and cool. I've tried dresses like this, but in the back, they make my butt look big again. So I'd have to make just the basic shift one without the, without the flounce. But it's reading a lot like that other one, like this one, the panel T, right? Like that's the, this is panel, right? And this is layer up, not that different, really not that different. This one I loved. Look at this. Oh, so beautiful. I love the orange and pink color blocking. You've got to look up on Google, like the 2023 color blocking trends. They're doing a lot of fun things like purple and yellow or green and purple or something. And you can get a lot of really fun, fun ideas for color blocking. But the shape of this I absolutely love. I was considering like what would it be like a little bit more casual and like not in a silky, but like, I don't know, something a little bit more casual that you can still wear with sneakers.  It's a flat, you know, you don't have to wear heels with it. And I just think this would be so much fun to sew. I do have a dress similar to this. Do you guys remember the one where I did all the print mixing from the same fabric collection? It might have been a meet me at six collection or something for the style maker video? Oh God, maybe two years ago. Do you remember I had long sleeves and there's like a floral print mixing thing? Anyways, that has this on it. And I love, I love that end in that version too. This is also a slit. So that makes it even even extra sexier. So you could obviously add a slit there too. I just love this. It's simple, but executed so, so, so well. A double cami. Okay, I know we haven't seen double camis in a minute. But you know where the there's a lower layer and then another layer on top. So, you know, there's that. I don't know that those need to come back. But if they do, here's where you can get one. The apron is repeated. And then we have another one of these kind of like cocoon dresses. This one's called the Gio dress. These are pockets incorporated into this scene here. But it's a batwing top with kind of like that, that bubble shape to it. Here's another gambit dress. Again, we only really see this one from this back, right? Is that what happened? Oh, no, there's a side view here. The fit is a little bit better on this one. Still not perfect. But again, it's just hard to pull these off without looking like a costume. Like the Mondrian dress, like, is just so iconic. I just don't see how you would wear that and people wouldn't think that you just went to a vintage shop. This one, okay, this is the scoop pinafore. I've seen this before, but I can't remember where. Again, it has the bubble hem, right? So I'd be having to remove that and straighten this out. But something that I think that they did a disservice here is this panel here, is this here. They made it gray. And I would like to see it all in navy. I don't think we have to like color block everything. I think some things can just be all one. I just, and maybe because they chose this shirt that's reading gray too, it just made it look like this is the pattern. It goes like this. And that I was like, that's strange. And like, that's very low, right? But when I realized it came all the way up to here, I was like, okay, because now I can wear it with like, you know, my fitted crop tops and stuff like that and not feel like weird or exposed. It does have that integrated strap again. I just love that. And again, these become pockets. I love a pinafore. I get so many compliments on the pinafores that I make and wear. Okay, these harvester pants. Another example where Tara is just carrying the weight of this all on her back. So we have this version here. Georgina made it a little bit more fitted, right? A little bit more like work appropriate. But look what Tara did. Oh, Tara looks so freaking cool. I love that they're bad here. I just think that oversized baggie like throw on I don't care. These might be my boyfriends who cares might be my dads. I don't care. Like I'm just throwing them on because I'm just going to go, you know, harvest some stuff in the backyard. They do have an elastic back and a flat front for fitting. And then there are pockets in the side seams. Oh, we don't even get a other. They are the little scoop pockets there. One little dart or I guess two in the front. And then like I said, elastic in the back. But, you know, Georgina made hers out of Dupeoni. So they're silky and, you know, nice. Whereas Tara made hers in linen, you know, never going to stretch out. I don't know.  Just love it. Tara killed that one. A quick make little basic dress where you can add a tie into. They never show the fish eye darts in the back, but there are some. And you sew the little tie into them and you can have it cinched at the waist if you want. There are floppy pockets option, but you know, there's something to anchor them to. So if you're not going to do the patch pockets, which I think are lovely with a little notch on them, you know, I don't know, I'd probably just skip the pockets altogether. But that's just me. And I'm really, really, really weird about floppy pockets. If you don't know this already. So that's just me. It's a me thing for sure. I know that. I think I might have converted a few of you, but okay. Do you remember that other jacket I showed you guys? This one here, the Reva jacket. This is the better version of the Reva. This one. This is called the swing jacket. Similar vibes, right? This triangle becomes the pocket also very similar. Now that I'm thinking of it to that quilted one to the one that had the little sunrise. Yeah, like this, this design with this being the pocket is very similar. It just doesn't have the band. So that makes me think I could just get this and make either version. But all of this is one. This is not a raglan. It's just all one piece. So a bit of a fabric hog, but it is really cool. I love the shape of it. Like I love how wide it is. I love how like where it hits on her, you could even go a little bit shorter or longer. But yeah, I just thought it looked really cool, right? And with like styled like this over like skinny jeans or something, I just love that silhouette so much. So yeah, this would be, if I'm getting one of those jackets, it's going to be this one. Here's a cocoon jacket. Again, bubble hem vibes. The notch on this one was really cool. And look at her version with this like ombre fabric. She just killed it. That looks so beautiful and so expensive, right? And I don't think the cocoon shape, you know, does anything to the figure, maybe because it's all black underneath. I don't feel like it accentuates anything, although she is full or busted on top, which I am not. So she's an hourglass or maybe an apple, but either way, she's a full or bust. So maybe that's why the cocoon is working for her. I just have to be really careful about anything that comes in under my butt. It just makes it look even bigger than it already is. So yeah, and then the pockets are incorporated into this scene here. Cool concept for a jacket for sure. She's also a little tote. And then this was the more elegant take on the artist's smock and the fisherman's smock. This one here, I was like geeking out over the fabrication of this, over the execution of the sewing, over the fit, just everything. I was like, this may be like an artsy fartsy designer collection, but this lady is the one who is selling artwork. She's the one who is a successful artist, whereas some of the other ones we've seen are the struggling artist. It's really interesting to me that in one collection, so different collection, we can go from forging in a field to literally like making the money. So that I thought was really interesting take on the collection as a whole. When you take in something like this and compare it against some of the more woodland type of designs, it made it really just kind of cool and interesting to me. They do offer the pattern pieces on this one where the grain line runs in opposite directions. So you can do this play on stripes if you want. But I mean, golly, that's pretty, right? Stunning. Then there was this one which surprised me. So it's called the Moon Pocket Maxi, and I still don't fully understand the point of the pockets. She's like, you can topstitch these down, but I just didn't understand the point of having the pocket go up. Like, you can't put anything in there. So I didn't understand why, like why wouldn't you just have a little, I didn't get it. I just, and I still kind of don't, but I do think that the style lines on this, like with this little thing happening here, are super, super pretty. This one a little less so. Maybe it's the colorway feels a little old, or maybe it's because it's this background with this, that all of that together is throwing me. But this one with like a drapey little fabric come on. She looks great. Is that Tara? No wonder. Like, Tara's biggest fan right now. But yeah, I thought the design, the style lines were really, really beautiful. There's a long slit on one side. I probably would just only do the bottom pocket. I just don't understand the top part, but maybe if I got into the pattern, I would see what the point of that was. But I don't know, I just feel like, yeah, really beautiful. For sure. Super pretty. Okay, then there's this weekend bag. And then we end up with this eclipse dress. Again, a bit of a rounded shape, but not so dramatic. The length of it is doing a lot of the work here too. How it comes all the way down to the, like top of your knee. And then the back is like just the below your knee. This colorway and fabrication is all wrong. So we're only going to look at this one, but it has a really nice turnback puff. And again, I just thought this one was effortlessly chic and cool. The big pocket, you know, the subtle play on pattern here. I just really loved this one a lot too. So there was a lot of redeeming stuff about so different. She has a lot of patterns, as you can tell. My overall take is that it is fartsy fartsy, but in a way that can be elevated or not.  So I'd like to know what you guys think though. Thanks for being patient with me as I re-record and do my second impression. I have a feeling some of you are going to like this version better because it's just so much faster, but nonetheless, we'll figure this out together. I'm going to try my best to make everybody happy, but as we know, that's nearly impossible. But either way, give me your opinions on so together. I'm sorry, so different. And yeah, I'll see you back next week with another Indie Pattern Collection.


The second group box is much more complicated than the first one. So we have in it, first of all, the tap widget, which has three tabs, and each of the tabs have different content. And below it, we have a button for running the actual query. So the first thing I'm going to do is drag the tap widget over to this group box. And the tap widget can also be found under containers because it's for storing other widgets. So I'm taking it and dragging it over and dropping it onto the second group box. And then I'm again changing the layout to vertical of the group box. As a result, the tap is now expanded. And we need a tap with actually three tabs, not just two, as is the default here in QT Designer. So I'm doing a right click on the tabs at the top and picking the entry insert page to, and then it doesn't really matter whether it's after or before. And then we have a tap widget now with three tabs. As I said, it's important that we name objects correctly so that they match the code that we will later show. And this tap widget, I'm going to show that, but I'm not going to show it for many more. So this tab widget needs to be called query services TW for tap widget. And the individual tabs that you now see below it, that's why I'm showing it here, also need to be renamed. I'm doing that directly here in the hierarchy by double clicking the name there. And then the first one needs to be named Nominatum, tap, because it's the one that has the content for querying Nominatum. The second one should be named GeoNames, tap. And the third one should be named DirectInput, tap. So this is just to demonstrate how you would name the objects for the individual tabs according to what the labels you see in the image. We still also have to change the titles of the individual tabs to say OS Nominatum, GeoNames and DirectInput. For that, we have to go into the property editor. So I have the first tab selected right now. And now I'm scrolling down in the property list to the green area, which are the properties that are specific for this tab widget. And there it currently says tab one for the current tab text. And that's what I'm going to change to OS Nominatum. And I'm doing the same thing for the second tab. This one should have the title GeoNames. And the third one, where the title should be DirectInput. Okay. Then in addition to this tab, we have the button at the bottom for actually running the query. I could directly at the button at the bottom, at the below the tab widget into the groupbox widget. But then it would expand horizontally to fill the entire window. If I just want it left aligned like this here, I'm first going to add a horizontal layout. So the layouts are right at the top of the list of widgets. So I'm taking that and dragging it to the area below the tab widget. It's directly below it so that it's still part of the groupbox. So now I've added the horizontal layout here. Now I'm going to add the push button widget which you can find under buttons. Dragging it over. It's actually in this case easier to drag it onto the horizontal layout we just created here in the hierarchy. And now we have the push button as part of the horizontal layout. And now we can to make it just a small button on the left and a horizontal spacer which is here in the QT widget list under spacers. And add that to the right of the button into the horizontal layout. We will aim, clue, carefully like this. And now you see that the spacer expands as much as the other widgets allow and as a result the push button shrinks to just take a bit of space to just show the label completely on the left. And we can now change the title of that button by double clicking it and then entering run query. And now we have the core structure of our second groupbox done but we still need to set up the content of the three different tabs. So I'm selecting the first step now, the one for OSM-Nominatum. And then looking at the actual tool we see that the content of this tab consists of two added fields, line added fields, two labels for them and one checkbox for enabling or disabling the country code input field. These are arranged in a grid layout. So we have a first column with just a checkbox, a second column with the labels, and a third column with the line added fields. So I'm going to start with the checkbox under buttons here. So I'm dragging that one onto the empty area of the OSM-Nominatum tab. Right click into the empty area and pick a grid layout. And I'm going to double click the checkbox to clear out the text so there should be no texts for that checkbox. And then you would still have to change the object name using right click object name. The next thing is I'm going to add the label. Labels are very close to the bottom under display widgets and I'm pulling it to the right side so that you get a vertical bar. That means I'm going to add the label in the cell that is to the right of the cell containing the checkbox. And then let me also add the second label. This one should be below. And then I'm going to add the two line added fields by dragging them over and placing them again to the right. So that was the first one and the second one. And now you see that we already have the correct layout that we wanted. I double click the first label to change its text to say country code column and do the same thing with the second label to change the title to say limit. And in the second field I'm already going to enter the value 10 as a default value that will be always there even without the user having entered anything into the field. And then we are done with the first of our tabs and we can move on to the GeoNames tab. The GeoNames tab again uses a grid layout but it has a few more widgets. It has actually four line added fields. Let me start again by... Let me start with the label for GeoNames username. So I'm dragging it onto the empty area of the tab and changing the title to GeoNames username. Then I'm going to change the layout to a grid. Again doing right click, layout, layout in a grid. Let me first add all the labels. So I'm adding a second label below the first and a third and a fourth one and the second one I call country code and third one feature class and the fourth one limit. Now let's add the two checkboxes for the second and third row to the left of the labels. So I'm dragging the first checkbox over until the blue bar appears vertically to the left. So then I'm clearing the text again so that we have just the checkbox and I'm doing the same as the second checkbox and now it's time to add the four added fields. So this is again line added widgets. I'm dragging the first one to the right of the first label. The second one, now you see that it actually shows the cells as rent boxes. So the third one and the fourth one. So now we have exactly the layout we have in the actual tool and I'm again entering a default value of 10 for the last line added field for the limit. And that means we can move on to the third tab for directly adding entering feature information for a single feature. Again, same procedure, we're using a grid layout. I'm first going to add three labels. One below the yellow changing the layout to grid. The first label gets the title name. The second label the title attitude and the fourth label the title longitude. And now the corresponding three added fields. The first one to the right of the name label. Second one in the cell below and the third one again in the cell below. And that's it, we are done with the service group box and can move on now to the next group box for displaying the results.


Hi, Ricardo! Hi, how are you? I'm good. How are you? I'm good. I'm good. Thank you for joining. Yeah, let's wait a little bit until more people show up. Okay. Maybe a couple, maybe two or three minutes. All right. Okay, so three minutes past the hour. Thank you for joining. Thanks everyone for joining. So yeah, today we have Yulin. We'll be talking about quark another runtime written in Rust. So yeah, take it away. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Let me share my screen. Yeah. Can you see my screen? Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Here I will introduce the quark. It is a high-performance secure container runtime. For the security runtime, we have three, let me present that. We have three major dimensions. First is security, another is performance. Here we are working on this Linux compatible runtime container. So we need it to provide Linux compatibility. Yeah. Here for the quark, we are using security based on the KVM-based machine, that's based on isolation. And now also we are using the secure program language, that's Rust. And for the performance, we are designing the dedicated for the containerized workload. And it's optimized for the multi-quark CPU and using this high-performance language Rust. And our goal is to provide that's the Linux compatibility. So far we already implemented more than 210 system quarks. In the future, we will add more system quarks and provide more compatibility. Actually, for the secure container runtime, so far in the market, there's another secure container runtime. First is Kata. Another is the divisor. Yeah. Yeah. Kata is based on the virtual machine. And it is a straightforward implementation that is running the container inside the virtual machine. In this mode, for the virtual machine, actually, we have a Linux kernel, that's a common architecture that we have a Linux kernel, we have a QML. And we also can run different OIS inside this in this machine. It could be Linux kernel, or the Windows kernel. Actually, we can, based on this architecture, we can get some performance opportunity. For example, for the QML, QML is a general purpose that's a virtual machine monitor. It supports not only Linux, it can support other OS. But for our Linux container runtime, we only need to support Linux workload. So this is an opportunity to optimize QML. We got a better VMM to get better performance. Also, we can, for the Kata, it's running inside Linux kernel. That's a, we can also get some opportunity to optimize that. That's a Linux kernel is designed to run on real hardware. But for the container runtime, in our target environment, it's running on the Linux kernel. So we can get some benefit to support the Linux kernel. And Linux kernel also supports all kinds of hardware and device. But because our container runtime only run on service, server hardware, so they have multi-core and have X64, CPU, 64-bit CPU, maybe in future we can support this ARM 64. And it doesn't support video and audio. And it don't need to support other devices. For example, the software, the software disk driver, that's still supported in the Linux kernel now. So we can get a benefit to support only limited hardware. Yes. And Linux kernel supports all kind of workload. But for the secure container, worker target, its workload is, majority is for the cloud native workload. His work item is TCPIP protocol. And also, may have this hardware disk IO, may also have this cloud-based IO, for example, RS3. That's a virtual disk IO. Eventually, that data is started in the cloud. We can do more optimization for that. So we designed an environment that's just the target for the container runtime. Just for the container workload. Comparing with the common Linux machine solution. It's developed a kernel. It will just work as a Linux kernel and provide the Linux kernel compatible system call to the Linux container application. And for the VMM side, we provide the Qweiser. It is working as a VMM. And different than the Qmo plus Linux kernel solution. The Qweiser can only support Qkernel. Also, Qkernel can only run with Qweiser. And the Qweiser can only run inside the QVM plus Linux kernel. So that we can do more optimization based on this more targeted architecture. This is our high-level design. For the part container, the Qkernel is running inside the guest kernel space. And the Qweiser is running inside the host. It's just like a common Linux application. And between the Qkernel and Qweiser, we use a special call mechanism to let the Qkernel and Qweiser communicate with each other. That's Qcall. Qcall is based on the shared memory-based communication between the Qkernel and the Qweiser. So when Qkernel sends a request to the Qweiser, we don't need every time to call a hypercall. Hypercall in the QVM architecture, the hypercall cost is very high. Based on this shared memory that's channel, the thread running inside Qkernel don't need to exit the guest space. We just use that shared memory to communicate with Qweiser so that they can get better performance, better throughput, and better latency. And inside this Qkernel, we have multiple water CPUs. And inside this Qweiser, we have one Qcall thread. This Qcall thread uses a shared memory queue to talk with Qkernel. So I'm waiting for the message sent from the Qkernel. And when they get the message from the queue, he just processed that use the Linux kernel system call to handle the request and then return the result to the Qkernel. We find that even we use that Qcall mechanism, the latency for some system call is still latency and throughput for some system call is still very high. So we also use it as an IOU ring, that Linux IOU ring to celebrate the process. With IOU ring, that's a Qcall and the Linux kernel directly shares a memory. And then Qkernel can send the IOU request to the Linux kernel directly. So in this way, we can get much better performance than the Qcall and the hypercall. But for the security reason, so far we only passed the data plan that's the data IOU request to use the URL. For example, the read, write, send message, we use IOU ring. For the other metadata related operation like the open and the socket, this kind of system call, we still use the Qcall so that we can have better check, another level check in the Qvisor to make sure this Qcall is not compromise the request. This is a high-level design. A question. So how did you handle the virtual CPUs, the resources? So, yeah, in the Qkernel, you may see four virtual CPUs, but what does that mean at the host level? Is there any sort of map in there? Oh, yes. Actually, in the KVM architecture, the virtual CPU is a host thread. Yeah. And it's virtualized in the host kernel, a guest kernel as the virtual CPU, but it's just a thread inside the host. In the guest kernel, it's just a virtual CPU. Yeah. And for that, in the Qkernel, we should have multiple kernel threads, just like Linux kernel. And for this kernel thread, we will just use this host thread, to handle this guest thread. But it's just like a kind of, that's a user-space thread. That's in the Solaris, that's the operating system, we have between the host thread and the guest kernel thread. We have multi-multi-multi-miking. That's, for example, eight host threads can handle maybe 100 or more. That's the Qkernel thread. Got it. Yeah. Actually, this architecture is just like, in some level, it's just like the divisor. But we have much different also than the divisor. Actually, this project is also motivated by the divisor project. We have learned much from divisor. But we have different design and different design. And we also do some optimization to, our goal is to get better performance. First, the optimization is that we use rust instead of go language. I think this is a major performance improvement area. We know that go language is a very good language. But it is not designed for this kind of, that's the OS kernel-level developing. For example, it doesn't support system-level, that's the memory management. It supports GC. And the performance is slower than the rust. Also, it also introduces a difference. First, that for the memory management, that's the divisor has its own, that's the heap management.  For the garbage collection, that means we cannot control the memory location fully control that. Before, maybe three years ago, I did some, that's Kubernetes, Kubernetes performance tuning. I find that the Kubernetes consume maybe a few hundreds of megabytes memory. When I do tuning, I cannot find where is it. And where likely it is, it is reserved by the GC. But now, for the rust, we can plug in our own, that's the heap management. So far, in the Qwizer, we are using body, body equation plus lava, that's manual management to manage the heap memory. Another is scheduling. That's, just now we mentioned that in the, in the KVM-based, that's a water machine. That's one host, host thread, map to one virtual CPU. And then we, and we have multiple kernel threads, we need to do a scheduling between this virtual CPU and the, and the host, the guest kernel, we need a scheduling. In the Qwizer implementation, it's based on the go round time strategy. And in the clock, we implement our own scheduling. That's the automizer for the, for the, for the, that's the IOU run call and the Q call. Yeah. But nothing is, that's a guest to the VMM call. It says you use the Q call. So that's the share memory, share memory Q-based. That's this, that's is also, we, when we do the tuning for the Qwizer, we find that's Qwizer, when they handle that's a high QPS call. For example, the, for example, the workload like a radius, that's the, for the radius, that's his, his call is just the, just have a small workload inside the memory process and then do the IO. That's a very high performance, high QPS IO. And we find that its performance is majority, the performance is bad and the majority that's the performance penalties at the hyper call. So we, we implemented this Q call and IOU run-based call. That's easy for the IOU run. It can also, it can directly bypass the, the, the, the guest kernel can call the host kernel directly and it can fully bypass the, the, the guest, the host application level, application layer, so that it can better performance. Yeah. Any question about that? Hi. Hi, Julien. Hi, my name is Cesar. I have a question, please. So in order to do the performance optimizations that you're doing between the communication between the guest machine and the underlying PMM, for example, you have sharing the memory, do you think that has any impact as far as reducing isolation? Because rather than going through a hyper call, which is a very sort of narrow interface, right? Yeah. I wonder if, if in, in, you know, going through the shared memory, yes, it's faster, but then it ends up reducing the isolation of the VM in the sense that it makes it easier, let's say, for an attacker that compromises the Q kernel to then get into the, into the Q device. Yeah. Yeah. Actually, this thing we need to consider that secure, we need to balance the security and security and the, and the, and the performance. That's the, that's the balance, we need to balance this. Actually, in theory, yes, we use a shared memory based communication between the Linux kernel and the host kernel. Yeah, this is the, we may get some larger, that's, that's a tech service, that's possible. But actually, I think we'd better do more evaluation for the concrete, that's, that's the threat model. So far, we haven't got a concrete threat model for that, for this model, for this communication, communication mechanism. Actually, for the user part, we also add some, some protection. For example, we only support the data plan operation, like the, like the, the, the read write, and also for the, for the, for the socket, for the metadata operation, like the create a socket and create a, create a file descriptor. For this kind of thing, we can also, also do more protect in the, in the, in the QCOR, in the, that's the QWither layer. And also, we, we limited the, the IOU, IOU RINs, IOU RINs, IOU RINs also based on the file descriptor. They also limited the permission for this, this FD. And so far, we haven't concrete that's threat model to see this, this model have security hole, but we will still working on that. I see, I see. So would you say that it, let's say compared to a traditional VM, right? Would you say that it's slightly less isolation at the benefit of more performance, but even though it's less isolation, you still feel that you still haven't found a threat, a security threat to break, to break out of it? Is that, is that, would you, would you say, right? Yeah. Actually, another level of security is based on Q-Colonel is, let's start as Linux, Linux, current Linux kernels threat model. This one large part is that it is developed as a C-language, so that there's, this language is not secure. When this object is freed and then it's powered, this, maybe it's, there's a much chance to compromise the whole kernel, but, but in our side, we developed the system with Rust. So at least this level, that's, that's attack surface is decreased. I see. So that is the kind of, so this is kind of balance between the, between the security and the performance.  We cannot fix all the bugs. Also, we cannot fix all the security hole. So we still need to balance between the security and performance. And one more question, if I may, about the Q-Colonel itself. Even though you're running the containers on top of that, correct? Doesn't mean that the Q-Colonel has the same concepts of namespaces and, let's say, maybe C-groups, you know, the things that the Linux kernel, the primitives that the Linux kernel has in order to create the containers. Do those also exist in the Q-Colonel or, or, or not really? Yeah, actually, our goal is that implement, our goal is to implement all the object inside the Linux kernel. So far, we've done support the C-group and partially support namespace inside the Q-Colonel. But for the Q-container, in the overall, who Q-container runs inside the Linux container, it has, it's running inside one name. I got you. Yeah, because you're running a single, a single sort of container per VM. So therefore, the Q-Colonel doesn't need to necessarily support multiple namespaces itself, right? It's like, like, almost like the, the whole thing is part of a single namespace. The underlying Linux kernel is the one that is separating the different. Yeah, for C-group, for this kind of resource isolation, it's still based on the host kernels that's, based on host C-group, yeah. All right, thank you. Yeah, thank you. Another question. So on the, on the share memory, have you considered a fallback mechanism that gives some users don't want to share their memory at the expense of performance? Oh, yes. Actually, we, actually, we support a three kind of call. First is the hyper power, a Q-car, and the IOU ring. Actually, this is, this hyper card is developed at first. So all the, all the, this is Q-car, Q-car request can support a hyper car. And this is just a switch inside our code. Got it. Got it. Thanks. Yeah. Okay. I can give more information about our current performance. We have tested that, tested our performance with, and compare that with Kata, and the, and the divisor. Here is our test result. For the, there are some, some, some metrics. First is the, is the start of time. That's the, this is our test result. We use the, we use the time command to test this. For the wrong, wrong say, that's just the wrong say means the wrong, wrong, the container, that's native wrong say on the bi-matter machine. And his start time is a, is a, is a 600 millisecond, and the clock is just like that. Is a, have small difference. But for divisor, it is a, this is still good. But for Kata, it takes a much longer time. I think it's also reasonable. Your Kata started a full, started a full-length kernel. And it already done much, I think it already done much automation, so that this is almost two, two second performance, I think it's pretty good. But still, it is a full-length kernel. So start-up time, that's Kata is the most slow. Also, another set is the memory overhead. I use the, that's the busy box to test the memory, memory is consumption. For the quark, it take this about 20, 12 megabytes overhead. He whether is 28 and Kata is the largest. It's because the Kata started full-length kernel. And, and actually for the memory side, we have more benefit with quark. For the Kata, it's the latest kernel. When they consume the memory, they cannot, they cannot release that to the, to the house kernel. So memory consumption, they are capable to increase. But for the quark, when the application freeze the memory, quark runtime can freeze that to the house memory. And this free memory can be used by another container. For divisor, similar things as, because it's based on the go-round time, they have garbage collection. That's the memory, free memory become uninspired. We also do some, that's performance throughput comparison. This is some, some, this is industry benchmark. The first one is the EDCD. And we can say that the EDCD is this, for, for a majority of this, or this is, this number is QPS. For one, say for the port operation is QPS is the 3700. And the quark is slightly smaller than it. For divisor, it's, it's still good. But for Kata, in this, this benchmark, it's the most slow. Similar thing that's for the EDCD, that Kata is the slowest quark, quark is better. And sometimes it's still better than the quark. But the majority of the quark is, is faster. Because so far for the divisor, sometimes it's better than the quark. We have no time to do deep, deep performance tuning. But we think that's for any optimization divisor can do, quark can do that either. So in future, we can fill this gap. Yeah, for the radius, that's something, that's something that divisor is not good, but Kata is good. Yeah, we can say that this is, this is the, the radius pass result.  So runC is our problem ceiling. Yeah. Sometimes, sometimes we quark can run better than the runC. I think it's maybe the test, test the problem. And in future, because we will use, now we are using IOU, in future we will target to, we may use more advanced technology, for example, RDMA to improve that's IOU, IOU performance. Maybe sometimes we can have better performance than the runC. Yeah, but overall, that's divisor performance is very low in this high QPS environment. And Kata is much better. But still overall, that's the quark performance is better than the. All right. So what's the, what's the metric on that, on that? Oh, that's QPS. QPS, okay. Yeah. Yeah. So all this test is based on throughput. So far I haven't tested latency yet. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. This is a NJEC test. We can say this quark is much slower than the runC. I'm not sure why it happened. Maybe in future I will do more problems for that. And divisor is much slower than the quark. And Kata is slower than the quizer. This is still the QPS. That's the, I use that's the guide, the most simple one that's the HTTP guide, test that. Yeah. Also, we, we also test some, that's complex scenario. For example, we use the modern DB and the Mexico's initial initialization. When we started, Mexico started modern DB, it has, it had a very complex system call. We use that for test. And still quark's performance is better than divisor and Kata. Yeah. Oh, this time is the second, how much time it will take to start a modern DB and the Mexico. Yeah. In summary, that's the quark's memory overhead is, overhead start time and performance is the best in this three, three contender round type, secure contender round type. Yeah. Any question about this performance? I have a question also, Julien, have you done any performance benchmarks measuring how many, let's say containers I could put on a host with just a bare runC versus, you know, with quark and with the other things, in other words, you know, it seems like these, these tests are just for a single sort of container, but I wonder if you start running, let's say, you know, if you get a big host and you start running maybe 100 or 150 containers, right? And then you do the same with quark.  The capacity is sort of Oh, I haven't, I haven't had that. Yeah, that's good, Mark. You're in future, we will add this. Okay. So our focus is the majority based on the throughput and then later we will pass this kind of density. Because sometimes you may get surprised, it may not scale linearly, if you think, you know, it may, or it may, or it may scale linearly, one, one never knows, right? But people are often looking at, okay, how much stuff can I run on my server? You know, right? And how much capacity, how much can I get out of it as far as workloads? Yeah, yeah, that makes sense. In future, we will add this kind of benchmark. The last part is, I can give some demo. Actually, we can, let me, here we have different, this feed, we have different commands to run, say, run quark, quark, debug, and run, I say, that's the Qweather, and Qweather, and the kata, you know, they have different runtime. Here, I just demoed, that's a demo execution for the Bshell, run, Bshell with Wubuntu, that's use quark. You know, this is a, this is, this use quark started, started the Wubuntu.  We can do the cat, for example, system, just like, just like this, this is a straightforward thing. And here, we can also, I can give more demo like, for example, DD, this is for some, for some disk commands. Here, for example, no, for this test, let's use the quark, release version, and his commands are 160, 160 megabytes in my, in my machine. And if we use the run, say, that's the, that's the, that's the Qweather, it's much slower. It is much slower. And the kata is better than the, than the, than the Qweather. Oh, this time it's your 100. Yeah. So, that's the quark is much better than that. We can also run some ETCD. This ETCD use a, use quark, that's our ETCD. And then I can run ETCD benchmark. This is the port list, MVCC port, etc. And the benchmark. Okay. This is the port benchmark. Oh, why this time it's, maybe you, why this time it's much slower. Maybe I, I just do the test, add some regression, problems regression. You're only 1000. That's weird. You're, but you're, maybe I, my, my code added some regression. Here, this is another benchmark. This is, this is the least capable live, this kind of thing. And we can also, oh, this log, oh, I, I forgot to, disable log, but I can add more logs, debug log. Let's go back and run the bash. And we can see in the log, we can see we got so many, this kind of system call from the application. This is the system read and F states, this kind of system call. Oh, this is the log.  And they have more car generator here, etc. This is the demo. There's lots of heart. Any more questions? I have a question also. So, I have two questions. One of them is, if I wanted to run, let's say quark on the cloud, right? Let's say I go to, you know, AWS or GCP and I get a EC2 instance, let's say on AWS, right? Which is itself a VM. And I want to run quark on it. You know, what do I need? Is that possible? Or do I need nested virtualization enabled? What are the requirements? Well, firstly, I haven't tried that. And that is possible. But we need to make sure that's the, for example, for the Amazon, I heard that his virtual machine is based on the KVM. And we need to make sure that's the, that's virtualization. This feature, that's the name, the African name, just to make sure that's the recursive, that's the virtualization kind of work enabled. So that, yeah, the nested virtualization, they call it. Yes. Yeah. I don't, I think Amazon doesn't support it, but I think Google, Google's GCP does have an option to. Yeah. Oh, Mr. Do you know Ricardo? Is that correct? Yeah, they supported and also Azure support nested virtualization. Okay, cool. Got it. And that would be enough, Julian. So let's say if you have a machine, as long as the machine supports nested virtualization, would that be something, would that be enough? Or are there any other requirements that you need? Yeah, I believe that's enough, but I haven't passed that. Okay, got it. We are common that's a KBN-based water machine. Okay. So it should work. Yeah. You may want to try that because that's, you know, the most common use case you're going to see, right? People are renting their machines from the cloud all the time. And so they're going to quickly ask about that. All right, good. And the other question that I had was, are there any limitations on the workloads that you can run inside of the container with cork? Are there any limitations that you know of? Yeah. Yeah, that's a very important part. That's the latest capability. So far, we've supported 200, more than 200 tons. That's a system cost. There's still some system cost we don't support. I got you. Yeah, we have tested some common service like MySQL, the NJX, this kind of thing. But maybe there's some simplification if they use a special system cork. And we won't support that now. But now we are working hard to add more support and improve this compatibility. Yes. Good. And other than system cost, let's say things like procFS, you know, slash proc, slash these, are they also compatible with Linux when you're inside of the container? Do they look exactly the same as they would on a Linux kernel or not? Oh, yeah. Actually, that's a good question. For the proc folder, we support some of them. It's still a subset of Linux. We don't support all of them. Got you. Got you. Got it. So you would say a lot of workloads run in it, but I'm sure there are certain workloads that either they use the system cost that you don't implement yet, or they do access things like proc that probably are not implemented yet, that right now don't work. Maybe in the future they will work, right? Is that right? Yes. You're right. Yeah. Okay. And one final question. If you were to launch a pod in a Kubernetes pod, does this work with pods? Because in pods, you have multiple containers. If they're sharing some of the namespaces, they're not sharing some of the other namespaces. For example, the network namespace they share, right? But the other namespaces they don't share. Have you tried this with Kubernetes pods? Yeah, we haven't done the full test yet. Firstly, we support that. Actually, one, how to say, one is pure kernel. We name it sandbox. Multiple containers can run inside of a sandbox. Just use run C to start, just like run C start, start the container inside a sandbox, that's possible. But so far, we have implemented some namespace inside a queue kernel, but we didn't fully test that. So we haven't tested that for the part. Yeah. Yeah, you may want to also work on that because that's also going to be a very common use case. People are going to say, okay, that's great that I can use Docker, but most people are like beyond Docker, right? They want to use it with things like Kubernetes. So that's something that I would also recommend that you put some attention on. Yes. This is our target. They must be able to run that inside a Kubernetes. Excellent. We are also collaborating with one company. That's one cloud provider company to work on this. This kind of requirement is a key requirement in a critical path to support Kubernetes. We are collaborating with them and try to add this support. Yeah. Do you have any users now or not yet? No, we are working with two cloud providers. One of them is trying to put some production workload, but we are doing that together, do that step by step. So far, we have no production deployment now, but someone is trying to do that. That cloud provider now is using divisor and trying to move to Quark. If Quark can meet their requirement. Got it. I had a few questions. So on the performance metrics, are you going to make those available, the slides that you presented today? I think people would be interested in looking at those. Yeah. Actually, all of them is inside the Quark, Quark Git as the folder that's the performance PDF. And another thing is how to test that, how to run that. This is how to reprogram this test result. For example, how to run this startup time and how to run different, run the ETCD, etc., always put here. And the test result is put in the promise.tdif. Right. Yeah, I think it would be also interesting to see some of the CPU utilization overhead between all of those that you compared again. Yes. So the other questions about the project. So you mentioned having a couple cloud providers interested in testing it out. When I first looked at it, granted that was actually a month or two ago. It was unclear to me who's sponsoring it, how many people are involved in the project. I just curious what the state of the project is today. So far, actually, we trust the open source this project last month. And we are in the initial stage now. So far, we have no solid sponsor now. So how many contributors do you have today? I'm just curious, is this just a start off as a personal project or a work project? What's your question? For the contributor, your majority is from our company and now some cloud provider is trying to contribute for that. But not a contributor, no, yeah. So, okay. I was just curious, is core containers like your company's product that you've been working on? Oh, it's already open sourced, yeah. And open sourced is an Apache license. And the majority of the contributors are from our company now. Yeah, I was just trying to understand where the sponsorship of it was coming from. Yeah. So I think this question is more about how did you get started with the project? How did, I guess, the idea became to fruition because of some of the limitations from GVisor and then you started that? Yeah. Actually, this motivated from the GVisor. I think at that time, quite a few people have thought to start to write a GVisor with Rust. And we just started working on that. Yeah. All right, that's great. Yeah, I think it's interesting. Thank you. Any other questions? So yeah, this is great. I mean, it's exciting to see this and yeah, it's an alternative to something like GVisor and Cata. And then you already applied for Sandbox, right? For the CNCF. Yeah, that's something we planned to donate this project to the CNCF. What are some of the things that you want to get out of being in the CNCF? What do you expect to get? More contributors, more community support? Yes. Yeah, that's the motivation is more a more contributor. Nothing is aligned with the CNCF ecosystem. They hope we can align and put it inside the CNCF ecosystem, be part of them. Got it. Yeah. All right, we've got 10 more minutes. More questions? I think that's about it. So yeah, thank you, everyone. Thank you for presenting and we'll keep in touch. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Bye.