Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/05/29/16:15:07
On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 09:37:16PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>>On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 11:05:23PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 08:18:46PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have an idea about how to work around this problem but I have to think
>>>>about how dangerous it might be. Basically removing the signal handling
>>>>wrapper around pthread_getspecific and pthread_setspecific. That may
>>>>work ok but I have to think about worst case scenarios.
>>>
>>>I've semi-convinced myself that pthread_[gs]etspecific do not need signal
>>>protection so I've released a snapshot which turns it off:
>>>
>>>http://cygwin.com/snapshots/
>>>
>>>This version is about 2.7 times faster than cygwin 1.5.17 but it is still
>>>not as fast as mingw. I don't think we're going to hit mingw performance
>>>since there are still cygwin overhead issues involved.
>>>
>>>AFAIK, this is only going to provide a speedup for this specific case.
>>>I don't think a general cygwin user is going to notice any improvement.
>>
>>Gerrit, if you have a chance could you confirm or deny if this change has
>>any effect for you?
>
>I just changed the DLL, application is not recompiled:
>
>Snapshot DLL:
>
>$ C:\cygwin\bin\time cygspd.exe cygspd.dat
>94.04user 0.61system 1:41.69elapsed 93%CPU
> (0avgtext+0avgdata 10560maxresident)k
>0inputs+0outputs (667major+0minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>
>Release 1.5.17 DLL:
>
>$ C:\cygwin\bin\time cygspd.exe cygspd.dat
>264.50user 0.75system 4:48.08elapsed 92%CPU
> (0avgtext+0avgdata 10560maxresident)k
>0inputs+0outputs (667major+0minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>
>It is about 2,8514851485148514851485148514851 times faster at my
>workstation.
Cool. Thanks for checking this.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -