Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 06:01:09 -0700
From: clayne AT anodized DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: pthread_mutex_init + gdb issue again
Message-ID: <20060508130109.GE18330@ns1.anodized.com>
References: <20060508084139 DOT GB18330 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com> <445F08CC DOT 4375998F AT dessent DOT net> <20060508094437 DOT GC18330 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com> <20060508102904 DOT GD18330 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com> <445F216C DOT 69EB1B52 AT dessent DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <445F216C.69EB1B52@dessent.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com


One thing about this 4-27 snap, and I noticed it with 4-03 as well (which I
reverted from a while ago) is that disk i/o appears to be ridiculously slow
in comparison to 1.5.19. In rough estimation, I'd have to say a 50% reduction
in I/O throughput. I notice it while working with mass updating of files and
builds. Is there any form of profiling, etc. enabled in the snap builds? As
even if there were zero optimization, it wouldn't be this noticably slow.

-cl

On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 03:46:04AM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote:
> 
> I expect that after 1.5.20 is out the door an updated gdb binary package
> will happen, and hopefully at that point it will be a lot easier to say
> "use the new version, see the release announcement" compared to "build
> it yourself from CVS".
> 
> Brian

--
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/