From: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce•org>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx•de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation•org>,
Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@telecom•at>,
git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: MinGW port usable
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:56:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070130155653.GB25950@spearce.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0701301635050.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx•de> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> > Just curious, but were these tests run with mmap(), or NO_MMAP?
>
> Both with NO_MMAP=YesPlease.
I wonder what the difference is between NO_MMAP=Yes and NO_MMAP=
on Windows. This is something I've never tried, but probably should
do. I run about ~25 developers on NO_MMAP= on Windows (all NTFS)
without issue, but now I'm curious if there's an actual performance
difference for some operations. There's no real rationale behind
my NO_MMAP= setting, other than that's how we've always used it...
> That said, I find the numbers quite convincing. On a (much weaker
> equipped) Linux bux, it takes 0.65s and 1.2s, respectively.
The time difference between the MinGW and Cygwin ports of Git
is certainly an interesting one, and says good things about the
MinGW work.
We're paying a price for POSIX compatibility on Windows, and its a
pretty high one it seems. I can't blame the Cygwin folks, they've
done a great job at trying to make the most of VMS. But sometimes
you just need Linux (or *BSD, or Solaris). :-)
--
Shawn.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-30 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-29 22:20 MinGW port usable Johannes Sixt
2007-01-29 22:35 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-29 23:11 ` Christian MICHON
2007-01-29 23:24 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-29 23:48 ` Christian MICHON
2007-01-30 7:59 ` Christian MICHON
2007-01-30 8:07 ` Christian MICHON
2007-01-30 10:16 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 15:27 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-30 16:31 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-01-30 8:47 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-01-29 22:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-29 23:08 ` Christian MICHON
2007-01-30 10:08 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 10:14 ` Christian MICHON
2007-01-30 8:45 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-01-30 14:35 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 15:18 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-30 15:38 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 15:56 ` Shawn O. Pearce [this message]
2007-01-30 16:12 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 16:28 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-30 16:49 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 0:50 ` Daniel Barkalow
2007-01-30 8:23 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-01-30 8:41 ` Andreas Ericsson
2007-01-30 10:07 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 17:09 ` Daniel Barkalow
2007-01-30 17:36 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-30 18:09 ` Daniel Barkalow
2007-01-30 20:20 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-01-30 5:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-02-01 6:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-02-01 10:34 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-02-01 21:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-02-02 8:28 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-02-02 8:49 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-02-02 8:55 ` Johannes Sixt
2007-02-02 8:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070130155653.GB25950@spearce.org \
--to=spearce@spearce$(echo .)org \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx$(echo .)de \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=johannes.sixt@telecom$(echo .)at \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox