X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 10:11:24 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: fork performance Message-ID: <20080519081124.GD731@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <48310648 DOT 90406 AT gmx DOT de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48310648.90406@gmx.de> 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: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , 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 May 19 06:47, Reinhard Nissl wrote: > Hi, > > running the following command sequence in bash yields little numbers > compared to a real unix system: > > while true ; do date ; done | uniq -c > > 15 Thu May 15 10:40:22 2008 > 16 Thu May 15 10:40:23 2008 > 17 Thu May 15 10:40:24 2008 > 17 Thu May 15 10:40:25 2008 > 17 Thu May 15 10:40:26 2008 > 16 Thu May 15 10:40:27 2008 > 17 Thu May 15 10:40:28 2008 > 16 Thu May 15 10:40:29 2008 > > Is there a chance to speedup performance? Cygwin's fork() implementation is *not* deliberately slow. Take a look into the sources, file fork.cc, and see what it has to do. Having said that, of course http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PTC Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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/