Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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
Message-ID: <4298F541.1000206@familiehaase.de>
Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 00:48:33 +0200
From: "Gerrit P. Haase" <gerrit AT familiehaase DOT de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
CC: Andy Ross <andy AT plausible DOT org>
Subject: Re: Serious performance problems (malloc related?)
References: <4297A14B DOT 9070409 AT plausible DOT org> <20050527234027 DOT GA7522 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <4297B572 DOT 9050200 AT plausible DOT org> <20050528005054 DOT GB7522 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <4297F984 DOT 3000800 AT plausible DOT org> <20050528061001 DOT GA9254 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <42987F19 DOT 8070502 AT plausible DOT org> <4298D87F DOT 9030203 AT familiehaase DOT de> <20050528225007 DOT U63183 AT logout DOT sh DOT cvut DOT cz>
In-Reply-To: <20050528225007.U63183@logout.sh.cvut.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes

Vaclav Haisman wrote:

> On Sat, 28 May 2005, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> 
> 
>>Andy Ross wrote:
>>
>>>But as I noted in my original post: It's not waiting on the disk
>>>reads.  Comment out the split() call and watch the delays disappear.
>>>Raw I/O speed in cygwin is comparable to mingw or MSVC.  The overhead
>>>is due, somehow, to activity within/under split().  Other than
>>>allocation, that function doesn't do any meaningful library
>>>interaction that I can see (although Vaclav's suggestion about
>>>exception handling is a very good one...).
>>
>>Can you port the testcase you provided to C to see if it makes a
>>difference, please?
> 
> 
> Or maybe at least try -fno-exceptions...

This speeds up things about 20% for me:

$ g++ -fno-exceptions -c cygspd.cc -o cygspd.o

$ g++ -fno-exceptions -o cygspd cygspd.o

$ time ./cygspd cygspd.dat

real    0m39.892s
user    0m38.405s
sys     0m0.155s

instead of compiling without the flag:

$ time ./cygspd cygspd.dat

real    0m51.071s
user    0m50.108s
sys     0m0.046s

Using optimization speeds up things again:

$ g++ -fno-exceptions -O7 -c cygspd.cc -o cygspd.o

$ g++ -fno-exceptions -o cygspd cygspd.o

$ time ./cygspd cygspd.dat

real    0m28.024s
user    0m27.030s
sys     0m0.061s


Gerrit
-- 
=^..^=

--
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/