X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 11:23:11 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Performance of 1.7
Message-ID: <20080508152311.GD32445@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <BAY109-DAV11D7F6C6D8ECC0C913C027CFD00 AT phx DOT gbl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BAY109-DAV11D7F6C6D8ECC0C913C027CFD00@phx.gbl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
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

On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 10:56:19PM -0600, Rob Bosch wrote:
>I've been testing cygwin 1.7 on Server 2008 with rsync.  First, the install
>went flawlessly.  I'm just using a standard path of E:\cygwin...no fstab
>issues.
>
>Compiling rsync worked without a hitch.  The rsync version is 3.02 with the
>preallocate patch applied.  The patch takes advantage of the posix_fallocate
>feature.  
>
>There have been two major improvements I've seen with the 1.7 build on
>Server 2008:
>
>- The long file name errors that used to always be a problem are no longer
>there which is great news.
>- The overall I/O performance is much higher.  I don't have hard statistics
>but have been watching throughput on the SAN connected to the server.  With
>old cygwin and Server 2003 I was lucky to get sustained throughput of
>40M-50M.  Now I'm seeing throughput of 100M-120M all the time with bursts
>much higher.  It is possible the performance gain is helped by Server 2008
>as I have not attempted to run the old cygwin on 2008 for a true comparison.
>I think a lot of it is also in the cygwin version since I'm sending the
>email to that list. :)
>
>Sorry I don't have any more hard data as we continue testing 1.7. Thought
>I'd at least let you know some of the nice things I'm seeing.

If you're using pipes in any capacity I would expect that you'd see some
improvement in throughput since I rewrote the I/O handling there to remove
the old head-standing which was necessary for Windows 9x.

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/