Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<009701c03584$3c411fb0$dbee85ce@timayum4srqln4>
From:	"Tim Prince" <tprince AT computer DOT org>
To:	<cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, "Chris Abbey" <cabbey AT chartermi DOT net>
References:	<4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 0 DOT 20001013184237 DOT 00b6cd70 AT pop DOT bresnanlink DOT net>
Subject:	Re: Cygwin Performance Info
Date:	Fri, 13 Oct 2000 19:12:40 -0700
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400

When I attempted to run lmbench on this old box both under linux and cygwin,
there were some tests on which cygwin/w2k fell short of linux by a factor of
2 or more (opening files, pipe throughput, and the like), and then there
were the cache statistics on which cygwin beat linux by a small margin.  I
was expecting lmbench to become better adapted to cygwin, but I have no news
there.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Abbey" <cabbey AT chartermi DOT net>
To: <cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: Cygwin Performance Info


> At 19:23 10/13/00 -0400, Laurence F. Wood wrote:
> >Can someone tell me where the performance hit is in cygwin unix
> >emulation?
>
> whichever part you use the most inside your tightest inner loop.
>
> seriously.
>
> that's a big huge open ended question (not about cygwin, about ANY
> library/platform) that is as specific to your application as you can
> get. For example, if you spend 75% of your computing day manipulating
> text files and piping them and greping them and running file utils
> against them then the cr/lf translation may be a big hit for you.
> On the otherhand if most of your computation in a day is spent answering
> requests that come in on tcp/ip sockets then the remapping of winsock
> to netinet.h functions maybe your major headache. (note, I'm not trying
> to imply that either function has a performance problem, merely that they
> would be representative places that would have high invocation counts
> in the course of the given activity.)
>
> To really answer that for your application/workload then you need to
> get some form of performance detailing that can tell you how much time
> you are spending in any given method and how often it's called.
>
>
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
>


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -