What is the output on each host if the PLTSTDERR environment variable is
set to 'debug'?
I'm thinking there may be uncompiled modules in your collects on
Windows. Setting PLTSTDERR=debug will show what the compiler is working
on during startup (and perhaps other useful things).
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 02:31:59AM -0500, George Neuner wrote:
> On 12/22/2014 12:02 AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> >Offhand, I don't know why you're seeing such a big difference, then.
> >
> >Regarding various ways that filesystem is cached in RAM, I
> >consistently see a big improvement in Racket startup times when
> >there's caching. Maybe you're using SSD?
>
> No SSD ... all is spinning metal. And as I said previously: Linux is a
> virtual machine running on VMware on Windows.
>
>
> Timing "racket -e '(void)' gives me ~225ms consistently on Linux ...
> 3-4s consistently on Windows.
>
>
> Timing a fresh raco make of one of my files is more interesting:
>
> Linux :
> time raco make -v utility.ss
> "utility.ss":
> [output to "./compiled/utility_ss.zo"]
>
> real 0m0.727s
> user 0m0.484s
> sys 0m0.244s
>
> Windows:
>
> Measure-Command { raco make -v utility.ss }
>
> "utility.ss":
> [output to ".\compiled\utility_ss.zo"]
>
> Days : 0
> Hours : 0
> Minutes : 0
> Seconds : 18
> Milliseconds : 287
> Ticks : 182879147
> TotalDays : 0.000211665679398148
> TotalHours : 0.00507997630555556
> TotalMinutes : 0.304798578333333
> TotalSeconds : 18.2879147
> TotalMilliseconds : 18287.9147
>
>
> With the file already compiled:
>
> Measure-Command { raco make -v utility.ss }
>
> "utility.ss":
> [already up-to-date at ".\compiled\utility_ss.zo"]
>
> Days : 0
> Hours : 0
> Minutes : 0
> Seconds : 11
> Milliseconds : 989
> Ticks : 119898359
> TotalDays : 0.000138771248842593
> TotalHours : 0.00333050997222222
> TotalMinutes : 0.199830598333333
> TotalSeconds : 11.9898359
> TotalMilliseconds : 11989.8359
>
>
> Even just checking timestamps, Windows takes 10 times as long as 1st run on
> Linux.
> Subsequent runs see 1-2 seconds quicker, probably due to caching the
> executable ... but insignificant compared to Linux.
>
>
> >Side point: I generally encourage programmers to run GNU/Linux
> >(without Gnome bloat) as their main workstation, unless they're
> >developing specifically for Windows or Mac. Windows itself might not
> >be the cause of your current problem, but it's the cause of similar
> >problems.
>
> The Linux machine is a server install - console only - so there certainly is
> a great deal of difference there. But again, Linux is running in a VM with
> 4 LCPUs (whereas Windows has 8) and is performing it's disk I/O through
> VMware and Windows.
>
> >Neil V.
> George
>
>
> ____________________
> Racket Users list:
> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
>
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
