Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Authentication-Warning: slinky.cs.nyu.edu: pechtcha owned process doing -bs
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:18:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: Andrew DeFaria <ADeFaria AT Salira DOT com>
cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: ftp way quicker than cp?
In-Reply-To: <bl4pkc$d5k$1@sea.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.56.0309271612210.3193@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
References: <bl4k23$69n$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 56 DOT 0309271419430 DOT 3193 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
 <bl4pkc$d5k$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org>
Importance: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Andrew DeFaria wrote:

> Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>
> > You are not really measuring the time needed for "cp". You are
> > measuring the overhead of SMB share access. Using ftp bypasses all
> > this mechanism completely, and sends files directly over the network.
> > Try comparing the time it takes to copy the file in Windows Explorer
> > to the SMB share and to an FTP location -- you'll probably see the
> > same results.
>
> I was aware that there is SMB overhead - just didn't think it would be
> that great!

Well, if you compared a cp to a local directory with ftp to localhost,
you'd get another datapoint...

> (BTW: How exactly do you get the time command working in conjuntion with
> a "copy the file in the Windows Explorer"! :-) )

Umm, have people forgotten already about the good ol' "wallclock time"? ;-)
Sometimes the old methods are still the best [*].

> > IOW, this is not really Cygwin-related.
>
> This is true if such large overhead is only attributable to SMB.

Well, that's what the experiment is for...  Alternatively, compare a
non-Cygwin ftp with a "copy" from cmd.exe (although that may skew the
comparison a bit if the ftp implementation is not too efficient).
	Igor
[*] Of course, I wouldn't mind at all if someone shows how to
programmatically measure time-to-copy in Windows Explorer...
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route
to the bathroom is a major career booster."  -- Patrick Naughton

--
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/