From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23192 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2015 14:08:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 23115 invoked by uid 89); 6 Dec 2015 14:08:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_PBL,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: calimero.vinschen.de Received: from ipbcc02fe8.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de (HELO calimero.vinschen.de) (188.192.47.232) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:08:54 +0000 Received: by calimero.vinschen.de (Postfix, from userid 500) id 43485A80629; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 15:08:52 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2015 14:08:00 -0000 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 2.3.0-0.4 Message-ID: <20151206140852.GB17433@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <87io4bucep.fsf@Rainer.invalid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="l76fUT7nc3MelDdI" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87io4bucep.fsf@Rainer.invalid> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2015-12/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 --l76fUT7nc3MelDdI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-length: 961 On Dec 6 10:58, Achim Gratz wrote: > Achim Gratz writes: > > On my local laptop things look a bit different, a small ~5% subset of t= he > > test above goes from 20s to 200s and a different larger ~10% subset fro= m 50s > > to 500s. While that hurts, the more usual case with many files from the > > same user doesn't feel any slower at the moment. The access through VPN > > will be interesting, though... >=20 > VPN access with the worst possible terrestrial roundtrip has been tested > for the same case now and goes from 52s to ~1700s or a factor of 33. So > roundtrip delay adds an additional factor of about 3, but the server > response time seems to play the dominant role even in that scenario. Uhm... is that good or bad now?!? Do you still think adding this functionality is a good idea? Corinna --=20 Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat --l76fUT7nc3MelDdI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-length: 819 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWZEF0AAoJEPU2Bp2uRE+gm18QAI4LaG7h2rHL0QbBbyFfJSKY XSI7Yae7sbyCRhQGGQU8KVjylQMl+JIavqaReQBXVBfvVHyMtEAHGVs9urL1cAd2 ayA7N1jFPzgNjKnBnvzE10bMnLhqOf2Se7XQgepYsi9xUKYOlfGXeYAEcKsBRXtM 80LXAYzUAl/elpYVILkbQcmQQlsFEjDprnsZm7bvpWDBL5P5lXPf/lAAaMJU8Azy IO3ksn8UVl9IrjCfJk1iPg1+uxUkhhIRO637oGhH+Va88ZaL6lAtg4hjSuT2YunJ 1yACql27vv6mS44Bvt1rRwFyDyxNu1vU12mSgKaeSnQZjFoKGMx+smweVBEtEvD9 H4HegoAipxlDhGhKRbg7wVZBs6u47ZDarJDsHTH7n00vRAFHl3hGzS62yvnT7DoS eeMwOn1ag2+cFNGGE/TBTdXfITg60zWVWKtj6Fqgpciag9P8NTofC0KG/toP1Mz7 6fihT/9cinTWpp55IJ4If0gXbeKwp2E1Vh807zYCLe3QRrdz0a7uE/JORsvBUBsN ZZM5BejA9o5IGD/Q5ExYpNCi7y9po3ynOmPBLjttl/3R0JEI/Wl0E2gCFh4yZTM2 WE0EdjPFMJGeJ1zH+i/Th/d3iek7dxLPCt5u4y870XrLbSVxbrwMMhGAsJisDFrj V+h659ERJp/WmuXMPRpS =K/QV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --l76fUT7nc3MelDdI--