Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: From: ian DOT ray AT nokia DOT com To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Cc: paul DOT floyd AT silvaco DOT com Subject: RE: cygwin 1.3.[23] grindingly slow Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 10:42:23 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2652.78) content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi, [...] > Is it faster or slower if HOMEDRIVE and HOMEPATH is set? > What is HOMEPATH and HOMEDRIVE? Aren't that Windows environment > variables? I never used them for Cygwin. I tested the patch on a (big) recursive make, it improved time from 12minutes to 10minutes. I used strace to look for performance bottlenecks. The patch made the improvement if HOMEDRIVE and HOMEPATH are set, because (at least in my test) doing a query for user information (using NetUserGetInfo() API) seems to be slow. YMMV. This is precisely the kind of feedback that I was interested in. There is no point in submitting a patch if it does not make an improvement :) FYI: I originally made the patch to snapshot cygwin-snapshot-20011001-1. Now, I wonder if all I have actually saved is some DLL loading time: and that you would only see a benefit during a big job, such as, for example a recursive make??? [snip] > So at least ls -lRa is *faster* without the patch (which is > version cygwin-1.3.3-2), the tests with the patch is a recent > debugging cygwin (pre-1.3.4, maybe this is a little slower > because of debugging?). Could you try again with a non-debugging version? Blue skies, .Ian. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/