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:in-reply-to:references:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=NoARRjb
	dA4+fM5SCs43/Gu2X8nsA2z9CC1IFjrGj1mDNIFvRmPZ3owMPKTCf/l5aYAc0Vki
	5b2FKeka5OnUFHYhuWWvBmYUtR+I2a0n3qz6Qpgs6GuhrKjKFeNzEXkNpJlORSpP
	/eyMbPVqLZzaXuxhF89QyCQQcjI4CxjVVqNk=
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:in-reply-to:references:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to:content-type; s=default; bh=XC/pUDEE7QMuM
	DS+4y9Us1pv5Gc=; b=kU28mMTa5EcZ8iIZ7nHN0j7qK3fTfKeXtK2sEvvSkKla7
	wHvMaetf3MRvjw/cmDkuRPVdQWgKYgb+Hg0dxsrjtcJ0x8aK9XUN5Rn5H7w2T/pB
	hMhqu6QSEp65iTefqQB6ge9TsPz41IsX+N82TEAuWxn4Phx2CPIimO31h4OhCA=
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=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=gregfreemyergmailcom, greg DOT freemyer AT gmail DOT com, H*i:sk:CAGpXXZ, H*f:sk:_K5Uub-
X-HELO: mail-lf0-f42.google.com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date         :message-id:subject:to;        bh=G+aWc41ejrvLV1AX+APIakoPWCAQVguMeT1qzgl0gM4=;        b=EoFYC5F3ePaOAlQMs7meRe9rwzamcHZSA6+D5Ki5eIeVWXDYHifAjxvuqLtKKL8Vt1         ACgaVE07HvQ/JMdfINbk1CvzOsRgSaSS3xk89huOolugsZ7T8U+LsmFTexU/9tIlZRWt         LdErAolNMZavxfPjtAuW9K13JS8cYZHb+gZzFhi4/OjEmra64iBauy/830TzaEIVGUby         ulNVRAW8MTwkeTeYfmsx0RwHFZvZIJ/Yq2vXNL9tuQVeJB6fV3peBy9LKWD5qf6OUs9X         2zNIhMOqBYGRIsm6ogS1VPt1SxjbotGOSKsS1/6jSvm8G9XKLpmH+oMSoOebUgY0eba9         m93A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXnKqjaNA388HdhNfalXxsXCxbgGDsaynqBh7tpuPQln52va5AHdmHhBGcIO5qHtca3gCnoLtCFPKw75w==
X-Received: by 10.112.134.229 with SMTP id pn5mr20422lbb.36.1460416082360; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:08:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGpXXZL9ZAJF_YSUOR=9WCvu+_K5Uub-zwWdpUV-yu7+OkYzFg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGpXXZJV-nsB=xyO7=EBUb-JCk5KqMPS=bvg2aWgw_jm4OZFsQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CAGpXXZLJ=O7y-6YEcODv4r32X96zGSU5PX9KwzwF3QedSV4iHA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <570BE03D DOT 7030709 AT gmail DOT com> <CAGpXXZL9ZAJF_YSUOR=9WCvu+_K5Uub-zwWdpUV-yu7+OkYzFg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
From: Greg Freemyer <greg DOT freemyer AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:07:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGpXXZKx19G-ixt5u59R+-5Rjn7yozwUEpLW1qFSY59Wckn8Yw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: rsync performance degradation? Could be a windows issue?
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Greg Freemyer <greg DOT freemyer AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> As I test, I just copied 30 GB of 1.5 GB files via robocopy.  None of
> the files had been accessed since a reboot, so none should have been
> in cache.
>
> According to Resource Monitor, yes.
>
> I'm getting about 105 MB/sec for read and 105 MB/sec for write vs  70
> MB/sec for rsync.

I just moved both drives to a Linux box.  Using the same rsync command
I'm getting 85 - 90 MB/sec.

That linux box is a 5-year old laptop, where as the windows box is a
pretty beefy box.  (6 cores, 64 GB ram)   Clearly the WIndows box
should be better performing and when running robocopy it is.

So it seems something about the combination of a Windows kernel,
cygwin, and rsync is dropping my performance at least a factor 20% and
maybe as much as 35%.

If I were to run rsync in strace, would anyone want to try and work on
the performance issue?  Or should it just be chalked up to rsync being
optimized for a linux kernel?

Thanks
Greg
--
Greg Freemyer
www.IntelligentAvatar.net

--
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