Again, not production, this was to highlight a point and to enhance (I would assume) the most common use case (file to file rsync).
Plenty of solutions for a good patch, complete the Windows version of stat() or call the Cygwin version if the Window's version fails. Since I don't have any confidence that the "Cygwin organization" will accept any patch I write (per Faylor), I really have no incentive to do the job right. Chris > On 6/4/2010 12:37 PM, Christopher Wingert wrote: >> So here is an example of a performance gain by not using cygwin stat(). >> I >> did this patch in about an hour (with the help of some git code), so I >> wouldn't recommend it for any production use. >> >> On a dry run rsync from my local drive to my NAS (105GB, 34k files, 4k >> directories). The current release cygwin rsync did it in [36m:43s], >> with >> the patch (below) applied, it dropped to [04m:48s]. > > But your patch only does a portion of the work that stat() is supposed to > do. I don't think there's any question that ignoring the need to fill in > certain stat fields will save time. But that's not really a workable > alternative either, if that's what you're implying. > > -- > Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com > RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office > 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX > Holliston, MA 01746 > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > A: Yes. >> Q: Are you sure? >>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? > > -- > 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 > > -- 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
