Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/06/06/11:47:39
On Windows ME, with the latest cygwin1.dll compiled from cvs, I get:
$ time ./test.sh 1
real 0m0.984s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.000s
root AT DRAGON /usr/src
$ time ./test.sh 2
real 0m3.194s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.000s
So I agree with Larry and Randall on that point. However, I have noticed,
during "./configure" sessions that when it gets to:
checking the maximum length of command line arguments...
The machine starts getting slower and slower, freezing for 10 seconds at
times. The entire process at that one step takes ~45 seconds. On a linux
box, it takes only 5-6 secs. On 1.3.10, this step usually takes at most
15 seconds. Sometimes, like when I am configuring gcc for a build, it
will crap out completely, complaining about being unable to fork. This
has happened consistently with the later cvs builds of cygwin over the
last 2 months. I have reinstalled cygwin on many occassions, so I know
that it is related to a "bad installation" as the problem is reproducable
every time. In the next example, I use gcc-3.1 as a test subject, though
let me be clear that it always happens when that line shows up, regardless
of what application I am building. If you want to see for yourself on
windows Me, try:
1)Install a fresh, "full" install of cygwin to the box
2)Build and install the latest cygwin dll and tools from cvs
3)Checkout the 3.1 tree from gcc cvs server
4)Run a vanilla configuration
5)Observe what happens on that line...
Of course, it might just be time for me to reinstall windows me, but
perhaps someone can confirm/deny my observations on another install of
windows me.
Cheers,
Nicholas
--- Russ Jorgensen <jorg928a AT yahoo DOT com> wrote:
> Was anyone able to resolve this issue? A few weeks
> ago I posted about poor bash performance with "while
> read" loops. Maybe this is the same issue...
>
> Anyway, I hadn't upgraded my cygwin1.dll for quite a
> long time, but when I did, some of my shell scripts
> started to have horrible performance. I tracked it
> down to the "while read" loops. I wrote the following
> benchmark shell script to see how bad the problem
> really is. On my PII-333 running Win-ME, I get the
> following results:
>
> # time ./doit 1
>
> real 0m3.555s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.000s
>
> # time ./doit 2
>
> real 0m22.870s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.000s
>
> When I run the same benchmark on a linux machine, I
> don't get nearly as big a difference between the two
> runs.
>
> It would be really great if one of the crack
> programmers who work on cygwin could look into this.
> I imagine that everyone who uses cygwin would
> appreciate a performance boost!
>
> Anyway, here's the benchmark shell script. Thanks.
>
> -Russ
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> #
> # benchmark piping into "while read"
> #
> # "doit 1" is the "first pass" which benchmarks
> # generating output with the nested for-loops
> #
> # "doit 2" is the "second pass" which adds on the
> # "while read" loop
> #
>
> # check usage
> if test $# -ne 1; then
> echo "usage: doit {1|2}"
> exit 1
> fi
>
> # first pass: generate a bunch of output
> for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0; do
> for j in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0; do
> for k in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0; do
> for l in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0; do
> echo hi
> done
> done
> done
> done |
>
> # second pass: the "while read" loop
> if test $1 != 2; then
> cat - > /dev/null
> else
> while read JUNK; do
> A=1
> done
> fi
>
>
>
> > At 11:42 PM 5/29/2002, Johnny D wrote:
> >
> > >I am not sure when this bug might have been
> > introduced. I have an app which deals with multiple
> > socket descriptors for reads and writes. It uses the
> > select() function call from cygwin library. I took
> > the same source code - compiled it with a newer
> > installaion of Cygwin (1.3.10 based). I see that
> > the select call seems to be getting stuck at points
> > and so the performance of my server has dropped thru
> > the floor.
> > >I dont have an older installation currently that I
> > can use and I couldnt figure out how to get an older
> > version of your package from the cygwin website. I
> > urgently need to get this resolved. Prefer to have
> > the complete Cygwin package dating close to Dec 2000
> > (whcih is the last best known version of Cygwin that
> > is known to work fine for me). Can someone point me
> > to the right location from which I can install the
> > same?
> > >Or if this is a known issue, does anyone have a
> > patch I could use?
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>
> --
> Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -