On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Achim Gratz <strom...@nexgo.de> wrote: > I am finding a large performance gap between plain "ls" and "ls -F" in a > directory with many files on a network share (NetApp disguised as NTFS if > that matters). This has been there for quite a while, I've just now > realized what the reason was (I have "ls -F" as an alias for "ls" in my > interactive shells). In a directory with 1300 files, a plain "ls" completes > in 0.3s, while "ls -F" requires about 95s. Determining the file class seems > to require around 70...90ms per file, which I can confirm also for > directories with a lot less files. What's involved in that determination > that takes such a long time?
The overhead appears to be in checking for executable files; using --file-type instead of -F, which just omits the '*' category, reduces the time for ls in one of my (local) large directories from over one second to 0.04 seconds. -- William M. (Mike) Miller | Edison Design Group william.m.mil...@gmail.com -- 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
