X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SARE_MSGID_LONG45,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20100123171936.GE23796@err> <1847a1f034b137ba0d95d8a866bfc070@mail.smartmobili.com> <28354068.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:49:56 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Cygwin slow on x64 systems From: NightStrike To: cygwin@cygwin.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 7:13 PM, greenup greenup wrote: > This is an old problem, the last I heard on it was something along the li= nes of: > "Cygwin's functionality/compatibility/robustness improved in necessary > ways, but performance was required to suffer" > From a hearsay perspective, it appears to be related to fork/exec > performance, and more specifically probably related to proper memory > allocation/management. > > http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2008-05/msg00387.html > > I'd say "Try using Colinux", but they haven't gotten their 64 bit act > together yet. =A0(barely decided they're going to try) > > One other time I was frustrated and got 50% improvement using a > smaller shell, (sh) but really that's a drop in the bucket, > performance-wise. Port cygwin to win64 via mingw-w64 :) :) (We'll help if you can do it...) -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple