Message-Id:	<m0yroDU-000S41C@inti.gov.ar>
Comments:	Authenticated sender is <salvador AT natacha DOT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
From:	"Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
Organization:	INTI
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Thu, 2 Jul 1998 15:43:00 +0000
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: bash eats cycles
References:	<359B4FDB DOT 689047E0 AT sis DOT co DOT at>
In-reply-to:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.980702132102.17177C-100000@is>

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Jul 1998, Gerhard W. Gruber wrote:
> 
> > Running bash under NT the system becomes considerable slower.
> 
> Everything is slower on NT ;-).
> 
> > I noticed the same when I let the Norton
> > Commander running and I guess that both of them are not aware that they are
> > running in "multitasking" (so much for NT and multitasking) and continuosly
> > poll the keyboard (or something other).
> 
> Please use the system monitor tool to see whether Bash indeed places any 
> significant CPU load on the system when it idles.  Please report what did 
> you see.
> 
> Bash calls the __dpmi_yield function in its idle loop, which is supposed
> to yield the rest of its time slice, so Bash at least tries to be a good
> citizen in the multi-programming environment (I don't know about NC, and
> it should be obvious that any analogy between those two is null and void,
> at least theoretically). 

NC doesn't call any dpmi_yield, under W95 the metter says NC eats 
100% of the CPU (not true in the practice).

SET 
------------------------------------ 0 --------------------------------
Visit my home page: http://set-soft.home.ml.org/
or
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Alternative e-mail: set-soft AT usa DOT net set AT computer DOT org
ICQ: 2951574
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA
TE: +(541) 759 0013

- Raw text -