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:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=CPTEt3R9iKvGxt/xGEvoXvlFnadER
	7w812V53ikV/e9OcPNdRhdjD5PVIjV5PNEK29UaVIcZHNqoIevRXTxxm34DGl/+9
	L6MQnTguMwQqFNbWLLW/rOlQDV67lEhbAYnXyHVSFyJXopmYmBWSdWBx+ZIqkgrj
	o98A3hgnZzbyk4=
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:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type; s=default; bh=P+PSFOW0XTUDfYVDKY4QTuCFbFg=; b=K7v
	MAF98+GfPS2vmj/3DwreGgD9JcMBMbQjFW3DFcYGCXoDq8G3ZHI2JgrLvncoe3QK
	tI5PSsVd2O/E+uQ1LXLvSb0k622qmEe8HhDmyQy0BslZD3HwqIsWrqB9svtRLNcu
	Yl/TFg2ju2eogo3MxZlzyLM6t72uwKG7qQ/Z/Qv4=
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=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_INFOUSMEBIZ,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: alum-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.117.5 with SMTP id ka5mr17898161igb.58.1446562792663; Tue, 03 Nov 2015 06:59:52 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 07:59:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK-n8j5ihsWL=acJE7bUTCHZuCUcKvk-hEPTAtfg0c00tuBi=w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Cygwin64 vs. Cygwin (speed)
From: Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert AT alum DOT mit DOT edu>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes

In another thread, I wrote (and Corinna replied):

>> I have tried 64-bit Cygwin in the past.  I do a lot of file I/O and
>> sorting/searching on largish test-based data sets, and 64-bit was
>> noticeably slower than 32-bit Cygwin,
>
> Hmm, I usually have the opposite impression...

I'm using malloc/calloc, is there a different memory allocator I
should be using for Cygwin64?

Thanks - Jim

-- 
Jim Reisert AD1C, <jjreisert AT alum DOT mit DOT edu>, http://www.ad1c.us

--
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