X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:18:35 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: lfn from scratch...
In-Reply-To: <000001c18eed$2b2a2460$1c7d76d5@zastaixp>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1011227181441.22136F-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Tim Van Holder wrote:

> Yes, but it's no different for Win32 apps; "dir \\foo\bar" also takes
> a long time to return, and having UNCs in PATH can _really_ slow the
> command prompt down.  It's a fact of live with UNCs; I don't why we
> should try to do better than the OS in that respect.

I don't care about the likes of "ls \\foo\bar"; that was just a quick 
(or, rather, a slow ;-) way to demonstrate what could happen.  My real 
concern is for programs that issue equivalent system calls: if you add to 
them some loop which walks all the possible devices trying to find the 
mapping, you will slow down the system calls to a crawl.

Not even a floppy is that slow, and with floppy, at least you hear it 
grinding, which gives you some clue about what's going on...