X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 01:24:29 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Cygwin Performance and stat() Message-ID: <20100605052429.GA4801@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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 Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 02:37:01PM -0700, Christopher Wingert wrote: >On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 03:16:43PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: >>On 06/04/2010 03:14 PM, Christopher Wingert wrote: >>>Agreed, I would like to make a global change, however, unless I can >>>talk to the current maintainer of the fhandler* functions, it seems >>>illogical for me to change them (as I have about a week of cygwin dll >>>experience). >> >>You ARE talking to the maintainer of the fhandler* functions - cgf >>knows what he's talking about, since he wrote the bulk of them. >He is? Holy crap, he is more helpful with his sarcasm and doubt than >anything else. Can't really parse that sentence. >However, it does explains his tone, given that I am picking on his >code. I haven't detected any "picking on" but then I can't claim to have written the fhandler* code anymore Corinna has rewritten most of it. I do know that if you want to be taken seriously you really need to send a concrete suggestion/patch. So far what I think I've seen is that you think caching will work but haven't provided an explanation of how. You've demonstrated that if you use less function calls than Cygwin does to fill in less information than Cygwin's stat() you can make something faster (which is what we already know git does). And, you've said this: "All that being said, I think the best solution is not to optimize the dll stat(), but to do it at the executable level. I see that Cygwin already has some level of patches at this level, it shouldn't be too difficult to support." Unfortunately, I can't parse that either. If you are not going to provide a patch, it would help if you would at least provide specific information like filename and function and maybe even a little pseudo-code to illustrate what you're talking about. So far, it seems to me that you're basically thinking out loud and expecting us to fill in the blanks. That's not an effective way to getting anything changed. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple