Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Injected-Via-Gmane:	http://gmane.org/
Path:	not-for-mail
From:	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sven_K=F6hler?= <skoehler AT upb DOT de>
Subject:	Re: Copy-on-write fork
Date:	Mon, 21 Oct 2002 23:42:33 +0200
Lines:	16
Message-ID:	<ap1saa$ar4$1@main.gmane.org>
References:	<018501c1e810$0bea9bd0$0100a8c0 AT advent02>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	pd9e58a96.dip.t-dialin.net
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	main.gmane.org 1035236491 11108 217.229.138.150 (21 Oct 2002 21:41:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	usenet AT main DOT gmane DOT org
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Mon, 21 Oct 2002 21:41:31 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016
X-Accept-Language:	en-us, en
In-Reply-To:	<018501c1e810$0bea9bd0$0100a8c0@advent02>

> A test program and statistics are shown below which clearly show Cygwin's
> fork implementation in the lead.

how much memory did your programs allocate prior to fork()ing?
copy-on-write might only apply to applications with high memory-usage.

another thing i didn't understand was, why you took a the real-time for 
mesuring?

i can do "time mc" and exit mc after 10sec and time will show real-time 
10sec but the _real cpu-time_ is below <1sec.
the CPU-times consumed by the copy-on-write-implemention is _lower_ than 
cygwin-implementation's CPU-time.

so why are you guys worried?




--
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 -