X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4CA48C58.1020004@sidefx.com> Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 09:10:48 -0400 From: Edward Lam User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: R: Cygwin 1.7.7 fork/exec performance MUCH slower than 1.5.25 References: <533759 DOT 75961 DOT qm AT web25504 DOT mail DOT ukl DOT yahoo DOT com> In-Reply-To: <533759.75961.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 > testing on /tmp/benchmark with XPS P2 > > cygwin 1.7.8s 20100924 You're testing on the latest snapshot against his cygwin 1.7.7 results. This gives me hope that Cygwin can become faster because Sagi Ben-Akiva was willing to track down the cause of the slowdown [1]. Last I read, it's not clear whether the latest CVS changes are faster though [2]. However, it's probably worth trying out the 20100926 snapshot. We haven't mentioned yet whether we are running under 32-bit or 64-bit Windows. It would be useful to know whether the problem only affects 64-bit Windows or not. Looking at the code changes, I would have thought it would equally affect 32-bit Windows. 1. http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2010-08/msg00964.html 2. http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2010-09/msg00796.html Regards, -Edward -- 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