X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 09:32:08 -0600
From: Brian Ford <Brian DOT Ford AT FlightSafety DOT com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Snapshot speed on managing files
In-Reply-To: <45AD8B48.2090600@cygwin.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.CYG.4.58.0701170906040.2732@PC1163-8460-XP.flightsafety.com>
References: <62410 DOT 52144 DOT qm AT web25001 DOT mail DOT ukl DOT yahoo DOT com>   <20070112102454 DOT GA8311 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>   <Pine DOT CYG DOT 4 DOT 58 DOT 0701121033010 DOT 320 AT PC1163-8460-XP DOT flightsafety DOT com>   <20070113181859 DOT GA5595 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>  <Pine DOT CYG DOT 4 DOT 58 DOT 0701161221490 DOT 2732 AT PC1163-8460-XP DOT flightsafety DOT com>  <45AD8B48 DOT 2090600 AT cygwin DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
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

To clarify a few things...

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:

> Brian Ford wrote:
> > A quick look via Filemon doesn't show where the time is going.  But since
> > I don't regularly run this way, I'm not that interested in pursuing this
> > further.

This statement was with respect to "Virus Scan Enterprise 8.0.0 On Access
Scan Disabled" before Corinna's patch.  I did not test after her patch
because, as I said, I wasn't that interested in this (the OPs original)
case.

> > I regularly delete 100,000 files at a time under 1.5.18, and the rm return
> > is rather snappy.  About two weeks ago I was cleaning space of my drive
> > under a then current CVS build with On Access Scan enabled (before my 64k
> > I/O change, although I don't think that's relevant), and deleting a few
> > thousand files was very slow comparatively.  So, I presumed I had seen the
> > problem.
> >
> > Since I can't duplicate this observation now, I'm sorry for the wasted
> > effort.
>
> Did you update your build recently?

This observation was before her patch, and my attempt to reproduce it was
also pre-patch.  So, no.

> Corinna checked in a fix for this on Saturday
> <http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-cvs/2007-q1/msg00021.html>.

My point was that her statements about her patch bringing only a
marginal performance increase, and the original code not being horribly
inefficient, appear correct despite my previous qualitative observation.

-- 
Brian Ford
Lead Realtime Software Engineer
VITAL - Visual Simulation Systems
FlightSafety International
the best safety device in any aircraft is a well-trained crew...



--
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/