Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com From: "Dave Korn" To: Subject: RE: Problems with Windows threads and cygwin sleep() Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:38:33 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20050825120922.GQ17452@calimero.vinschen.de> Message-ID: ----Original Message---- >From: Corinna Vinschen >Sent: 25 August 2005 13:09 > > Even if we can't do much about it, it would be interesting to find out > how Cygwin affects CPU usage of non-Cygwin processes. > When I moved from 2k to XP I noticed that running big cross compiles in the background in a bash shell was much more obtrusive than it used to be, and could cause other (gui) apps to be unresponsive and stall; I always use taskmanager to lower the priority of my bash shells these days. I think that MS must have buggered up^W^W'improved' their scheduler between 2k and XP, and this interaction is a result. My first guess is that there's some competition for a locked resource of some kind, and this particularly interferes with scheduling under heavy load, but that's only a guess at the moment. I think tracking this one down might be easiest with a proper windbg/remote kernel debug setup. cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today.... -- 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/