Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx AT aldan DOT algebra DOT com>
Organization: Virtual Estates, Inc.
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: poor performance -- is Cygwin to blame?..
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:52:49 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <200212201452.49875.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com>

Hello!

I have a PVM based distributed application. One of the set of computing
tasks is initially distributed to each participating machine.

After that, each machine gets a new task when it returns the results for
the previous one. The Linux box outperforms the Windows XP on the same
hardware -- Dell Dimension 4500 Pentium4 @2.26 GHz -- at the ratio of
325:200... An earlier Dell Dimension 4400 with Pentium 4 @2GHz running
FreeBSD is proportionally slower than the Linux box, but still beats the
Win boxen by far..

Another (older) FreeBSD box running on PentiumII @450MHz is on par with
Win2K on Pentium3 @1GHz.

The computations are NOT memory intensive, but involve a lot of
``double'' number crunching (with log(3), pow(3), exp(3), et al).

The PVM and the computing program are compiled under CygWin on Windows.

The same optimizations flags (-O -march=pentium3 -fomit-frame-pointer)
are used with the same GCC 3.2.x compiler. (On the older FreeBSD, the
march is pentiumpro and the GCC is 2.95.2).

I know about Windows' bloat, etc., but am surprised to see it make SO
much of a difference. May be, using Cygwin gives too much overhead, and
I should continue on the painful path to using the "native" Windows PVM?

Thanks,

	-mi


--
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/