From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: cygwin vfork
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 08:26:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011112210630.GA25356@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20011111082600.21n1fLolcTNJzGU-J_3DcHISzKPKz5Q2pa8HAlrCHqQ@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3BF018AD.9000105@ece.gatech.edu>
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:45:01PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Seen on the XEmacs list:
>
>> In general the cygwin build is slower, I think this is for 3 main
>> reasons:
>>
>> 1) gcc optimization is not as good as MSVC
>> 2) The cygwin portability layer adds a lot of overhead especially
>> wrt file handling.
>> 3) The cygwin implementation of fork-and-exec doesn't jive well with
>> the VM size of xemacs. Supposedly a real vfork is in the works for
>> cygwin but I can't attest to its functionality.
>
>Does #3 make any sense? I thought we *had* a real vfork...perhaps it
>doesn't work well with large apps? Or is the author just blowing smoke?
We have had a sort-of-vfork that should be faster than fork since 1.3.3,
I think. No idea what the VM goobledy-gook is referring to.
Cygwin's vfork is just black magic that eventually results in running
spawn(P_NOWAIT) rather than fork/exec.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-11-12 21:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-11-01 14:47 Charles Wilson
2001-11-01 16:27 ` Christopher Faylor [this message]
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-01 20:08 ` Tim Prince
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Tim Prince
2001-11-01 20:56 ` AW: " Ralf Habacker
2001-11-02 1:17 ` Charles Wilson
2001-11-02 6:00 ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Charles Wilson
2001-11-02 6:05 ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-11 8:26 ` AW: " Ralf Habacker
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Ralf Habacker
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Ralf Habacker
2001-11-11 8:26 ` Charles Wilson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20011112210630.GA25356@redhat.com \
--to=cgf@redhat.com \
--cc=cygwin@cygwin.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).