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:to:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s= default; b=PZ1ydsRcYXVCqtSquv4VBIkYGL9QfxLqXgeMH0mKHwHI+w6nNHtJD MMz/T08RVv5T8Zbnpj59xq5UzN01VfynuAeyfLz62EDdVsRx3JLF/XAxXyhKhGQd Int2FLxyI2WWuS+UQUjrxWffYkmyx2JQVchlxNHg+znilQC8nA6YX0= 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:to:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default; bh=SnR5XhgYawGsKwPOwyrA3MudPb4=; b=WvWvGztW1BaAaexh7qiABXjolGBR Jyxf0UKAG7LncIkr7U+EpShrR6g+mVtLcOAPiwsXkQO8hsYSougycVDcGaLvOuyO pXt8yydMWy3BlFSWwBs/P8G/1sWlgPN8OtYyDFqIKPkpQxOiezzM/upQE49VA30J 3TY8wDRl7lmQ0po= 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 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: calimero.vinschen.de Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 18:37:33 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Cygwin64 vs. Cygwin (speed) Message-ID: <20151103173733.GB31094@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="U+BazGySraz5kW0T" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) --U+BazGySraz5kW0T Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Nov 3 07:59, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote: > In another thread, I wrote (and Corinna replied): >=20 > >> 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... >=20 > I'm using malloc/calloc, is there a different memory allocator I > should be using for Cygwin64? There is none. While Cygwin's malloc is slow in multi-threading scenarios due to dumb locking (which I really hope to fix at one point), it shouldn't be any slower on 64 bit compared to 32 bit. Corinna --=20 Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat --U+BazGySraz5kW0T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWOPDdAAoJEPU2Bp2uRE+gJw8P/1GteU4mfTaeAEsXCFv4Vw4m 1lh+heVREvwGKQu+e5EbwyQX0B3egdc/cQmHuRfg2IVng6p4hIspOOaOEyjIrF0M 9Lv11vdP8+q2p3BEgjmNMCb9G/yGwwyTLXVCb+4nAHonrgkMNto6BK0uUJg7awLP kKwTpUpT9vpV2M13Tme0CitDges/sYCA3cQo0qSZm0gEafmgj5APzsAFtBj520yq w9z5N1sDz3usJubzkku+bI5aDHy+LfpYxIynLej3m4CrZ+p+82WFB5EmOH+Bk68K A6V6NwcuC45dTTCxY1Bg9Y1NLO2PhUuHx4w2Dpch1iPqDPGmErzVFNO35g3LL8dG 4MT/hRULyWEpRWIzitwve5QSktA95dSyf7uUCfEErQcRXWTdVYYfW7jVNXYI2R/c 9qyCK2TC2XJz8carr8pap/rrUknERUQCbOmWYRcuV16+BdNr2gGqw9BMi3p4EIGO QbuGj/hDni6vfMhDwAzBeN6edzlNkTS5wGZiG2YwL9bjp6ubD0gOnwb3W4jsTRZj BvF2ahE2EhNqcuA+1X8PjWkQuDbbGBoJ60EVBAgN4gkjEvbelD0Ta1X/VxXvmKX0 ggtbdNSpKd2/pU7peKmnDglfH6eZWdqclHhfp6Wk+IQcmk855ajiM3DXZK6HbhNA Nukoi/SrsecQwOzORjgd =XxjN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --U+BazGySraz5kW0T--