Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 22:59:44 +0400
From: egor duda <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.53 RC/4)
Reply-To: egor duda <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Organization: deo
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <186168543292.20010908225944@logos-m.ru>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin slowdown in current cvs version
In-Reply-To: <127165775081.20010908221336@logos-m.ru>
References: <130160175780 DOT 20010908204017 AT logos-m DOT ru>
 <127165775081 DOT 20010908221336 AT logos-m DOT ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi!

Saturday, 08 September, 2001 egor duda deo AT logos-m DOT ru wrote:

ed>>   did anybody noticed that cygwin runs slower than before? i've just
ed>> tried to perform full rebuild of newlib and received the following
ed>> results:

[...]

ed> Yet, it's only half of the story. cvs build from just before this
ed> change still work slower than the build i've used daily since the
ed> beginning of August. I'll try to dig a little deeper now.

ok. after going back to as far as 1st of June i've started to think
that i should probably take some lessons in, ehr, positive thinking :)

it looks like the rest 10% of slowdown is not actually a "slowdown"
but rather a 10% speedup... I don't remember for sure but it looks
pretty much like i've been running my locally-hacked version of
cygwin1.dll, which replaced statically-allocated /dev/dsp buffer with
malloc()ed one. I'm not sure if such change could account for 10% of
performance, but we're getting too close to the statistical noise
threshold here to know for sure.

To resume. I think we should back out Corinna's "reread /etc/passwd"
patch for now, wait for some time until dust settles, and release
1.3.3. after that i'll try to remake my /dev/dsp patch and see what
performance gains it gives (if any).

Egor.            mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet 2:5020/496.19