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
Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 21:20:52 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Performance problems
Message-ID: <20050605012052.GA6138@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <4297A14B DOT 9070409 AT plausible DOT org> <20050528131501 DOT V53507 AT logout DOT sh DOT cvut DOT cz> <20050528160424 DOT GB12395 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <429ED094 DOT 9080001 AT tlinx DOT org> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 61 DOT 0506021301320 DOT 10282 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu> <20050602172226 DOT GC6597 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <42A2246D DOT 3090000 AT tlinx DOT org> <20050605005508 DOT GA2706 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20050605005508.GA2706@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i

On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 08:55:08PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>I merely represented our current thinking about the subject that you
>raised.

Oh, on rereading this thread, I remembered that the main reason that I
responded at all was that Igor suggested SHTDI and PTC.  I thought it
behooved me to let people know that we're already actively discussing
caching implementations in cygwin.  I didn't want anyone to be tempted
to go off and start working on a caching implementation when we're
already discussing implementation details.  So this is one of those rare
cases where we've already got S TDI and a P to be TC may be imminent.

cgf

--
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/