X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
From: "David Tazartes" <davidt81 AT earthlink DOT net>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <4A9EA9D5.2070000@bopp.net>
Subject: RE: Simple bash script is slow to execute - appears to be time spent  starting commands like ls
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 14:01:55 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <E1Miu9g-00033d-0h@elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
X-ELNK-Trace: 5bf265d7c89f1e8e1aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec7993117630c528c39ebdb4c54ae5c25ca4350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT 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

Jeremy Bopp wrote:

While I believe the usual forking performance issue is probably the
largest factor for your problem, you *are* running an instance of
Windows Explorer.  It's displaying your desktop which as you indicate
above is holding the folder containing your work area.  My guess is that
you're seeing those usage spikes because of that fact.  Try working in a
tree which is outside of your desktop, maybe in /tmp, and see if that
makes any difference for you.

I can't reproduce the slowness you're seeing in general however, even in
a directory on the desktop, but then I'm running with XP rather than Vista.

-----

This is a good suggestion, but it didn't make a noticeable difference.

Let's say we focus on the echo | cut slowness I mentioned earlier. This is
independent of the CWD and doesn't cause the explorer.exe spike but is still
200 times slower on my Vista laptop than on a low-powered Linux server. If
we correct this problem, I'm pretty confident the time per loop will go way
down.

I've also confirmed these results on my work PC. It's much faster than my
laptop (120 ms vs 800 ms) but it's still much slower than the 2-6 ms I get
on the server.

Thanks,
David



--
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