Re: [ITA] wxWidgets3.0

[Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty <hamishmb@live.co.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2802 bytes --]

On 23/11/2020 20:05, ASSI wrote:
> Hamish McIntyre-Bhatty via Cygwin-apps writes:
>> Okay, wow that is a LOT quicker. I haven't timed mine precisely buts
>> it's something like:
> Just look at the files in the log/ folder.
Okay, shall do once this build is done.
>
>> Compile 2 hrs, install 40 minutes (64bit), 120 minutes (32bit),
>> packaging probably like 5 minutes.
> Ouch.
>
>> I have an NVME disk, but all my VMs (including this one) are on a SATA
>> disk, and it's a Samsung QVO 1TB one that was cheaper but also slower
>> (sustained write slows down to 80 MB/s eventually). Read is quick
>> though. IIRC it's presented as SATA to the VM too.
> What you really need to look for is IOPS/latency, not bandwidth.  I
> rarely see upwards of 60MByte/s through NTFS unless very large files are
> involved (and only then I've ever seen it surpass the SATA barrier of
> ~550MByte/s and not by much), but the QVO is better suited for warm
> storage / backups and has pretty long response times and the low IOPS
> that come with it when you fill the queue.  The NVMe on the other hand
> mostly registers below 1ms where the former SATA disk (a WD Blue) was
> all over the map up to almost 300ms at times and around 3…10ms average
> under load.
I did a test with CrystalDiskMark and my speeds for sustained read and
write were 2+ GB/s, and 4k and random were 100MB/s and 40MB/s, so I
think that should be good enough. I think the GB/s figures come from
using the I/O cache (host is Linux), so it's just reading and writing
straight from/to RAM. The system itself has 32GB of RAM as well.
>> I'd better have a look at my configuration. Maybe do some disk and CPU
>> benchmarks. This is in virtualbox so perhaps it's yet another problem
>> with that, in the long list of problems I seem to have with virtualbox.
>> The VM has 16GB of RAM dedicated to it, how does that compare to your
>> system?
> That system is at its official max. configuration of 32GiB (4x8GiB ECC).
> But as I said, it was running around 6GiB for the whole build with some
> brief spikes to maybe 8GiB.  So that seems unlikely to be your problem.
>
> You run your VM (virtual storage controller) in AHCI mode or not?  That
> should be the standard option for a recent Windows VM, but if not, then
> rather abysmal disk performance is semi-expected.

Yeah, it's AHCI.

I've tried turning Avira Antivirus off for the next rebuild (segfault
and wxpython issues may be have been due to STL, not gnomevfs). I
already had exceptions for C:\cygwin64 and C:\cygwin, but we'll see if
that makes it any quicker. I guess I'll keep digging in the meantime.
Perhaps Cygwin and VirtualBox just don't work well together. I'm not
sure if it used to be faster.

Thanks for all the help,

Hamish


[-- Attachment #1.1.2: 0x87B761FE07F548D6.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3235 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]