X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 12:55:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Igor Peshansky <pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin fork()
In-Reply-To: <20060901155403.GE5926@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0609011235170.16050@access1.cims.nyu.edu>
References: <20060901100138 DOT GA7444 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com>  <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 63 DOT 0609011023420 DOT 13719 AT access1 DOT cims DOT nyu DOT edu>  <20060901153709 DOT GC7663 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com> <20060901155403 DOT GE5926 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
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

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 08:37:09AM -0700, clayne AT XXXXXXXX DOT XXX wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 10:33:47AM -0400, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> >> While Cygwin is an *emulation* layer, and emulation is inherently
> >> slower than straight execution, there are other potential reasons for
> >> the slowness.  Check your anti-virus and firewall software settings.
> >> If possible, exclude the Cygwin filesystem from checking by those
> >> tools... Even little things (like making the tool aware of the
> >> often-used Cygwin programs and telling it to not check "outbound
> >> email messages" (!) sent by those programs) can help speed up
> >> Cygwin...
> >
> >It's definitely none of those as I don't run any firewall or antivirus
> >software whatsoever on this box. Windows 2003 Server, minimal set of
> >services. The machine literally sits at 0% CPU unless I'm using it.
>
> Try using binary mounts instead of text mounts.

This thread already had two suggestions for possibly speeding up Cygwin...
Does anyone, as a service to the community, want to start a "Cygwin
performance tuning" web page and keep track?  It might even end up in the
User's Guide eventually...
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu | igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

--
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/