X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
X-AntiVirus:	PTMail-AV 0.3.88
X-Virus-Status:	Clean (0.16738 seconds)
Mime-Version:	1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.3)
In-Reply-To:	<001401c651d0$872c9090$b3db87d4@multiplay.co.uk>
References:	<048501c651b8$0862c1c0$a501a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <001401c651d0$872c9090$b3db87d4 AT multiplay DOT co DOT uk>
Message-Id:	<89F9E813-1E27-4FEE-9359-6C73A8CD871A@ptnix.com>
From:	Pedro Inacio <pedro DOT inacio AT ptnix DOT com>
Subject:	Re: very poor cygwin scp performance in some situations
Date:	Mon, 27 Mar 2006 23:22:52 +0100
To:	Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

Hello,

I've initiated the post "select() too slow".
The example I've done was a non-blocking tcp echo_server.c and how  
slow it was on linux compared with cygwin.
In fact after activation oh tcp_nodelay option the times were similar.

Meanwhile I've done another test, I've added ssl on top of that  
echo_server.c with similar results than on linux, with the  
tcp_nodelay set, and the results are again against cygwin binary.
On cygwin is too slow. I just don't know where the problem is.



On 2006/03/27, at 19:59, Steven Hartland wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Korn"
>
>> On 27 March 2006 16:39, Steven Hartland wrote:
>>> I've done quite a bit of digging and not found any real answers
>>> on why cygwin's scp performance is so poor.
>>  See the thread about "select() too slow" last week for an  
>> explanation of the
>> Nagle algorithm, how windoze's implementation of it appears to be  
>> crippling,
>> and how using TCP_NODELAY can fix everything.  (Thread ran from 11  
>> Mar to 19
>> Mar).
>
> As a quick and dirty hack I channed set_nodelay into set_nonblock  
> which
> seems to be set on all the sockets but unfortunately it doesn't  
> seem to help.
> Anyone more familiar with the internals of openssh know where this  
> might
> done?
>
>    Steve
>

--
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 -