Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <010101c239a9$29c04d40$6132bc3e@BABEL> From: "Conrad Scott" To: References: <20020801163716 DOT GA20607 AT redhat DOT com> Subject: Re: potential instability in cygwin after my last checkin Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 23:17:02 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 "Christopher Faylor" wrote: > So, it's possible that my current implementation is actually slower than > the old one. I'll check on that in the next couple of days. I've just done some timings with a pair of test programs, where the server echoes everything it's sent and the client repeatedly sends packets and waits for replies. They also do a select before each read from the socket (I've got a problem with selects for writing so that's not in the test program as yet). Anyhow, timings (done with bash's time command, averages over 3 runs): Before Chris's changes: real 29.9 seconds user 1.8 seconds system 6.75 seconds After the changes: real 23.4 user 1.3 system 4.88 which is a nice 20% improvement, not slower at all. Just for comparison, the same test w/o any selects: real 1.1 user 0.15 system 0.30 so there's still some room for improvement :-) Of course, the other point here is that the code seems to work fine (I'm also running XEmacs w/ gnuserv and CVS too). // Conrad p.s. I've been assuming that bash's time command returns sensible values for the user and system times: they look plausible. Are they known to be good?