Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3CCAD5E3.8080000@ece.gatech.edu>
Date:	Sat, 27 Apr 2002 12:46:27 -0400
From:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language:	en-us
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Gareth Pearce <tilps AT hotmail DOT com>
CC:	Cygwin-Apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: ITP: netpbm
References:	<F190XF2aZcdjaS36Il000001262 AT hotmail DOT com>

Gareth Pearce wrote:

>> > As for the # of executables in the /bin directory, isn't
>> > there a limit to the number of files and/or directory entries
>> > in any one directory on win32?
>>
>> As has already been said, not past the root. However directory search
>> time is O(N) on FAT, vs (IIRC) O(logN) on NTFS. So directories with many
>> files leads to signficcantly longer lookup times - and thas when the
>> filename is known!.
> 
> 
> My experience - on ntfs ... 


[snip]

> Except in one area.
> cd'ing to the directory in the first place - can take a minute or more, 


NTFS uses a btree to store directory and file information, leading to 
O(logN) lookup times.  If you were doing that on FAT, it would require 
FAR more time.  That's what I meant by saying "directory size is limited 
by your patience" -- lots of files in a directory == long waits for ls, 
find, etc.  It's not as bad on NTFS, but cygwin is used on both NTFS and 
FAT...

--Chuck

- Raw text -