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: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:39:09 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Quick testfeedback...
Message-ID: <20010912203909.A26194@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <1000209619 DOT 7293 DOT 196 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> <20010912184031 DOT X1285 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <20010912184812 DOT Z1285 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <20010912125641 DOT A18358 AT redhat DOT com> <20010912192104 DOT B1285 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <20010912132302 DOT A18631 AT redhat DOT com> <1000334802 DOT 31743 DOT 37 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1000334802.31743.37.camel@lifelesswks>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 08:46:41AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 03:23, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I *am* concerned about YA performance hit on Windows 9x, though.  I'd like
>> to avoid that if possible.
>
>No hit, its been like it is now since day 1. (Well actually there was
>the process wide mutex serialisation when I first started hacking at it,
>but thats long gone).
>
>I just had the opportunity to make NT *faster*.

I noticed.  It's noticeably faster.

In fact, for some reason, cygwin *feels* faster now.  It seems to start
up zsh much more quickly.

I"m wondering if this is, in part, due to the use of critical sections
in reading /etc/passwd.  I can't believe that it would have that noticeable
an effect but I don't know what else to attribute it to.  It seems faster
than 1.3.2.

I guess I just worry about the potential for cygwin mailing list whines
about slowness on 9x.  Maybe I'm getting overly sensitve to that.  :-)

And, getting our own implementation of TryEnterCriticalSection is
something I'd always wanted to try.

cgf