Mail Archives: cygwin/2007/11/23/12:05:37
* Christopher Faylor (Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:25:50 -0500)
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 06:05:49PM -0000, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
> >* Corinna Vinschen (Thu, 22 Nov 2007 16:42:10 +0100)
> >> ==== CYGWIN THANKSGIVING EDITION ====
> >>
> >> I've made the new version of the Cygwin DLL, 1.5.25-1, and associated
> >> utilities available for testing. Version 1.5.24-2 remains the current
> >> version for now.
> >>
> >> This is a bug fix release. Important changes since 1.5.24-2:
> >
> >Unfortunately the changes that made rsync run about 2 - 6 times faster
> >[1] (on a backup of about 100,000 files residing on a FAT32 volume)
> >didn't make it into the prelease.
> >
> >The first snapshot that exhibited the stunning increase was the
> >snapshot from 2007-08-02 and the last one was the snapshot from 2007-
> >08-13.
> >
> >[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin/91350/focus=91509
>
> So, does this mean that the snapshot was faster and then it wasn't?
Yes, all the snapshots between 2007-08-02 and 2007-08-13 were much
faster. You remarked "does rsync use pipes by any chance? If so, that
may be at least part of the reason since that code has been revamped."
Unfortunately I don't really understand Corinna's suggestion "Using
gcc and cvs you should be able to find out which change after the
2007-08-13 snapshot slowed rsync down again."
Does it mean that I should compile any committed change after August
13th? That won't work because I never used cvs or gcc on my own.
> Or that the snapshot was exhibiting a problem with unclosed file handles.
There was an issue but it was fixed right away by Corinna[1]
Thorsten
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin/91507
--
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 -