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:to:from:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=pFh kn9Z5wkj3UnD4BDszp91ynwfcyVRojr3JQo8qxTgi3BcVsfWLdmf/pZjnPSmeeQU 37nlR11wWnJDwvJRvsjiYJ1tfanwalCFVFB5xb2cE6scZ4nKh8gGCjfeAdQjyb1T sCzQ60DtYvHM6EE3y/S6q7LfbNvHDVRsAzUIYpRA= 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:to:from:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=4OGX9J3Ik 3zcI1ZFNiFH70YwrUs=; b=oQCToGS5uqiNQ1jijyMCV2VVfJzux/8c7Xue2uTB7 AFgdqJs9iAQUU2JohZpfMghMI6vo8VatxUmT9cu9wVDSjbSXcyUWMnpvHSWX0365 1zS+PLcLSkMFg2iVS/tJ0gH327dwdWxcEudTxFzxGW3gCi2F0ZoJi3zao29tVSwn tE= 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=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=1300, determining, determination, disguised X-HELO: plane.gmane.org To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: Achim Gratz Subject: Performance of "ls -F" Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 15:44:48 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 12 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-IsSubscribed: yes I am finding a large performance gap between plain "ls" and "ls -F" in a directory with many files on a network share (NetApp disguised as NTFS if that matters). This has been there for quite a while, I've just now realized what the reason was (I have "ls -F" as an alias for "ls" in my interactive shells). In a directory with 1300 files, a plain "ls" completes in 0.3s, while "ls -F" requires about 95s. Determining the file class seems to require around 70...90ms per file, which I can confirm also for directories with a lot less files. What's involved in that determination that takes such a long time? Regards, Achim. -- 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