X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject
	:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=sQ6a+FtYP76TdUDE
	gc4oMW9VTf64RFZ+30hiWfZcz3D761PBKG73mo85XJd3mA2HLH82AoaQrVBF+RCo
	8rdQtPk0BCMQzyLHNpfLtyzLt5acVKBqOoAqYPR/0SuUjksiJ+0g+GNJWlWsj9kC
	zrlN/xmR9nc4w5Qg6fHK5tLq4Ow=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject
	:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=+oAsj5bp2xBVnd6zkS0Jp/
	NkDC4=; b=OLJy18XkNF73oNV7rvX7eAEfOq2NVAhkCUoOzbUFWeaILlAR/e78Ui
	ORCbo5RfgjKr8Nj1docHZHhZr9KRHoJC8adsY/Q5NNQDvrNaIW3ynwKy3+EvgClk
	Nfg7JCGPqyZ/xoVsl3FnJnAsJiCptCawh6GFixklwKmyw7IBRgEr4=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_THEBAT,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: smtpback.ht-systems.ru
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 03:12:19 +0400
From: Andrey Repin <anrdaemon AT yandex DOT ru>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <765945729.20140228031219@yandex.ru>
To: Corinna Vinschen <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: Testers needed:  New passwd/group handling in Cygwin
In-Reply-To: <20140227134632.GG2246@calimero.vinschen.de>
References: <20140225200414 DOT GA4238 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <87y50zaqjb DOT fsf AT Rainer DOT invalid> <20140225215423 DOT GA6065 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <loom DOT 20140226T085959-119 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <20140226100209 DOT GR2246 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20140226135222 DOT GW2246 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <loom DOT 20140227T095414-414 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <loom DOT 20140227T100638-8 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <20140227094951 DOT GD2246 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <loom DOT 20140227T134714-188 AT post DOT gmane DOT org> <20140227134632 DOT GG2246 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes

Greetings, Corinna Vinschen!

>> > 1 second?  That sounds still a bit slow.  Considering that I'm now
>> > member of 414 groups, and you are member of 440 groups, the extra number
>> > of groups cannot account for that.
>> >
>> >  This sounds surprisingly as if the
>> > names of some of your groups are not cached on your machine.  Or
>> > something.  Or is this a rather slow machine?!?
>>  
>> It's not a slow machine by any means, but it certainly gets its fair share
>> of security policies, so it may have something to do with that.  I don't know.
>> 
>> > Still, it seems like the right thing to do to drop the group name
>> > configuration stuff entirely.
>> 
>> Yes (unless you'd want to make it configurable like the getpwent stuff).

> Nah, not really.  As I said, I'm questioning some of the old functionality
> anyway, and the less we have to ask AD the better for us.

> I applied my patch which removes this group name change facility from AD
> and uploaded a new snapshot to http://cygwin.com/snapshots/.

> While we're at it, I just had this weird idea.

> What if, as soon as the first Cygwin process in a process tree starts,
> this process not only caches the primary group info, but also caches all
> supplementary groups from the user's token?  This would slow down
> startup of the first process slightly, but it would speed up any
> subsequent request for group information of a group in the user's token.
> An `id' call would be almost instant, and `ls' calls would probably be
> faster as well.

Umhm. I'd have to see, how slightly. Because my primary use of Cygwin tools
does not expect to have a parent Cygwin process. (I.e. diff'ing between
file manager panels.)

> As always, there's a trade-off: Users running cygwin processes from CMD
> a lot would encounter a slowdown.

> What do you think, guys?

Needs some tests. I would certainly appreciate faster initial startups, but if
the delay is manageable, I can cope with more long-term friendly approach.
I've got entangled in current work and lost track of snapshots for now.
If there's some DEF's in library, that I can toggle and rebuild it with certain
features enabled and disable for local test, I'd be glad to have a round at it
over weekend.


--
WBR,
Andrey Repin (anrdaemon AT yandex DOT ru) 28.02.2014, <03:06>

Sorry for my terrible english...


--
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