Message-ID: <467161BB.A157E0BC@dessent.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 08:41:47 -0700
From: Brian Dessent <brian@dessent.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Cygwin allocted time slice
References: <017001c7ae32$49dff3c0$0600a8c0@ze4427wm> <20070614034243.GA15091@ednor.casa1.cgf.cx> <006a01c7ae97$7c225cf0$0600a8c0@ze4427wm>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

Aaron Gray wrote:

> Weird I was getting very long compile times for GCC and on using 'time' was
> getting indications that make was only getting 25% of total system time.
> 
> I'll see if it is repeatable on another system.

Hint: Cygwin is slow.

Emulating fork() takes a complicated dance between parent and child.  A
lot of this involves one waiting for the other to complete a stage of
initialization.  Thus, a Cygwin process that spawns a lot of children
does a lot of waiting.  It is a price you pay for being able to compile
POSIX source unmodified on Windows.

Also, I/O.

Also, Cygwin is around ten years old now, and people have been
complaining that it's slow for approximately 9 years and 364 days.  Do
you really think that if speeding it up was a matter of just setting
some scheduling flag somewhere it would have gone unnoticed all this
time?

Brian

--
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/