delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/09/01/10:51:40

X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 10:51:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Igor Peshansky <pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: clayne AT anodized DOT com
cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin fork()
In-Reply-To: <20060901104950.GC7444@ns1.anodized.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0609011048540.13719@access1.cims.nyu.edu>
References: <20060901100138 DOT GA7444 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com> <00b801c6cdaf$343b9a10$a501a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <20060901104950 DOT GC7444 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
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

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, clayne wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 11:12:59AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> > On 01 September 2006 11:02, clayne AT anodized DOT PCYMTNQREAIYA wrote:
> >
> > > Is it just me or is cygwin fork(), or a support syscall underneath,
> > > terribly slow for some reason?
> >
> >   Some reason == "lack of O/S support".
>
> Basically, this is what I'm talking about:
>
> Opteron 180, fast disks, ran make clean, make 4 times or so to keep the
> disk/mem/cpu caches hot; no extraneous system usage going on:
>
> $ ( make clean; time make -j1 ; make clean; time make -j8 ) >/dev/null
>
> real    2m20.062s
> user    0m13.252s
> sys     0m37.139s
>
> real    0m45.654s
> user    0m15.968s
> sys     0m49.201s
>
> That's a huge difference, and it's only like 6300 lines of code!  I've
> narrowed it down to something between 20060309 and 20060313 snapshots. Every
> snapshot since 20060313 has had this incredible slowness issue with fork().
>
> The dual-coreness isn't going to make a huge difference here as I can get
> the same factor of speed up just by using 20060309's dll and the exact
> same make jobs. Nor is it a case of minor differences in times. I've tried
> different versions of libtool, gcc, etc. Everything just goes back to
> 20060309 vs 20060313.

Ok, but now you're in a perfect position to debug this further.  There
were only 6 sets of changes between those two snapshots (see the
cygwin-cvs archives).  If you can build Cygwin as of those times and
pinpoint the change that made the difference, that in itself would
probably be helpful in diagnosing the problem.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu | igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

--
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 -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019