X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4A429ABE.8080201@cygwin.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:29:34 -0400
From:	"Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090320 Remi/2.0.0.21-1.fc8.remi Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Slow/sluggish response ("system" task at 50%)
References:	<h1ofen$qvu$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <4A3FCCBD DOT 70101 AT cygwin DOT com> <h1ok6h$b50$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <h1p35n$rtc$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <4A401CF4 DOT 6050202 AT cygwin DOT com> <h1plfn$16o$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <4A405B7D DOT 7020700 AT cygwin DOT com> <h1r1dv$4g4$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <4A411665 DOT 1040300 AT cygwin DOT com> <h1rnnl$a3j$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <4A4167A4 DOT 4090900 AT gmail DOT com> <h1tcpr$g4o$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <h1tv52$fu5$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <4A428460 DOT 4000402 AT cygwin DOT com> <4A428B01 DOT 5010903 AT sidefx DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<4A428B01.5010903@sidefx.com>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.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

Edward Lam wrote:
> Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>  > Interesting.  I'm not sure why using Cygwin's 'make' would slow things
>  > down dramatically when running from a Cygwin terminal or shell.  I can
> 
> Note that cygwin's make is just plain slower that mingw's make to begin 
> with. I'm not quite sure I can explain the ~25 times speed difference 
> that Gene experiences but I can definitely vouch for at least a ~7 times 
> speed difference (which I think it primarily due to forking).
> 
> Here's a speed test taken from an old thread on the cygwin mailing list. 
> I did this test just right now with virtually no CPU usage on the same 
> machine (WinXP SP2 x64, Intel Core i7 2.66 GHz):
> 
> (MINGW)
> $ uname -a
> MINGW32_NT-5.2 SEOUL 1.0.11(0.46/3/2) 2009-05-23 19:33 i686 Msys
> 
> $ time -p for ((i=1; i<100; i++)); do var=$(echo $i | tr [a-z] [A-Z]); done

Sure, we all know that Cygwin provides Linux emulation and suffers some
overhead for it.  But timings from an individual machine can be misleading.
Running this through multiple times for both Mingw and Cygwin 1.7 on my
similarly equipped machine, I see Cygwin is somewhere between 1.7 and 2.25
times slower.  Whether yours or my result is more typical, I can't say.
But as you noted, neither data set provides much justification for the
results reported.

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -