Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sourceware.cygnus.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 18:08:31 -0800 From: Geoffrey Noer To: cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Cygwin performance (was [ANN] PW32 the...) Message-ID: <20000313180831.I8690@cygnus.com> References: <20000313180414.15800.qmail@web107.yahoomail.com> <20000313180414.15800.qmail@web107.yahoomail.com> <9886.000313@is.lg.ua> <4.3.2.20000313181326.00b8a590@pop.ma.ultranet.com> <20000313185555.B24233@cygnus.com> <38CD87BE.B69B05A7@sigma6.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <38CD87BE.B69B05A7@sigma6.com>; from Jeff Sturm on Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 07:28:46PM -0500 On Mon, Mar 13, 2000, Jeff Sturm wrote: [...] > Don't be so sure. I've used GCC on Interix for a while... let's just > say that Cygwin rocks. > > The Interix product relies heavily on the POSIX subsystem, instead of > shared memory as Cygwin does. For many of my user applications the > subsystem process actually consumes more CPU time than the application! [...] Interesting. We have been trying to improve (and succeeding in improving) Cygwin's runtime performance but that's been done comparing Cygwin to Cygwin-past and not so much by doing benchmarks against other systems I think. Have people run any benchmarks comparing Cygwin, Uwin, NuTcracker, Interix, anything else out there? -- Geoffrey Noer Email: noer@cygnus.com Cygnus Solutions, a Red Hat company http://www.redhat.com/ -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com