On 2009 Oct 12, at 16:42, Angel Pais wrote:
Przemyslaw Czerpak escribió:
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009, Bruno Luciani wrote:
Windows applications can be executed without any problems using WINE
but the performance of IO operations is fatal. Even simple tests show
that database access is over 10 times slower then in native
applications.
DOS applications executed by DOSEMU are only about 2-3 times slower.
best regards,
Przemek
You're failing the comparison point.
Meassuring apples against bananas.
We cannot compare gui applications against console apps.
To me it seems "2-3 slower" is comparing native DOS environment
vs DOSEMU, while "10 times slower" is native WIN environment
vs WINE. Not DOS[EMU] vs WIN[E].
Console ones are faster even on windows.
Unless you are developpping a web server, i/o access is a minimal
part of all your app running time.
I/O also means network IO to me. If this is true, also networked
apps are affected by WINE I/O performance overhead. In a remote
terminal situation even local I/O overhead is crucial in a database
app.
It's also not unimportant whether a reindex takes 15 minutes or
150. But that's just one (stupid) example. If a query takes 20 secs
instead of 2, that's even worse.
The other issue is that every emulation layer has its own set of
issues, so it really adds up to complexity, maintenance, fragility,
proneness to errors, and at the end stability. Certainly not ideal,
but good to hear it can work reliably, if not fast.
Is serialize/deserialize is such a huge task to implement in uhttpd?
We have core function calls to do that, so I wonder?
Brgds,
Viktor
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
