public inbox for cygwin@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall@rfk.com>
To: arnaud@apiic.info
Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Strange performance of Bash depending of current directory
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 06:59:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20011207094137.02363cd0@pop.ma.ultranet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C0CC905.2000806@apiic.info>

At 08:00 AM 12/4/2001, apiic wrote:

>Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
>>
>>At 05:56 AM 11/30/2001, apiic wrote:
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>At first, thank you for CYGWIN environment which is so useful, specially for me to settle shells both on NT stations et UNIX stations. I ask about a strange problem about Bash performances
>>>of scripts depending of the type of NT local directory.
>>>
>>>I maintain a bash profile running on NT4 station with CYGWIN and on IRIX station. This profile is stored on UNIX (IRIX station with Samba) server.
>>>
>>>Some users complaint about low performances of this profile running on their NT4 station.
>>>I found that all users complaining got their home directory on UNIX station (net use with Samba).
>>>The others got their home directory on NT station.
>>>
>>>So I wrote a little script and tested it, first in local directory and second in Samba directory. Here is the result :
>>>
>>>1) Running script in local directory (c:/users/<username>)    2 seconds
>>>2) Running script in share directory (net use Samba)          4 seconds
>>>
>>>Script :
>>>#!/bin/bash
>>>
>>>for ligne in $(mount | grep system | tr -s [:space:] | sed 's/ /,/g' )
>>>do
>>>   path=$(echo $ligne | sed 's/,/ /g' | cut -f1 -d " ")
>>>   point=$(echo $ligne | sed 's/,/ /g' | cut -f3 -d " ")
>>>   echo $point monte sur $path
>>>done
>>>
>>>It appears that performances of scripts depend of the current directory in which they are run. I made several tests and it seems that variable HOME
>>>and variable PATH have no relation with this behaviour.
>>>
>>>I read FAQ and Mailing list archive without any answer about this problem
>>>Thank you for helping
>>
>>
>>
>>The overhead of network access is not insignificant with Cygwin.  Putting
>>network directories in the path can have a significant performance impact
>>too.
>Thank you for answering.
>Unfortunately, it does not help me. Is there any way to improve performances
>regarding current directory or the path with CYGWIN ?


Putting directories that you use frequently earlier in your path is 
sometimes a help for long paths.  If directories you use frequently are
network paths, this may not prove helpful though.


>By the way I made further tests and I found that NT network directories are faster than Samba network 
>directories. I use Samba 2.0.5. Is there any tuning to do with Samba to improve my CYGWIN environment
>performances.


Not that I know of off-hand.  You can check the email archives (or the 
source! ;-) ) for possible settings for the CYGWIN environment variable 
that might help here.  I seem to recall that there is one for SAMBA
specifically but I forget the issue it was targeting.  Just a guess
but I suspect your performance differences between your NT machines and
those accessed through SAMBA are based on network/hardware differences.
I could be wrong.  There are allot of potential differences here.  You
can check the SAMBA sites for SAMBA tuning information of course.


>Thank you again for helping
>>
>>
>>
>>Larry Hall                              <mailto:lhall@rfk.com>lhall@rfk.com
>>RFK Partners, Inc.                      <http://www.rfk.com>http://www.rfk.com
>>838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
>>Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX
>>
>
>
>-- 
>
>Arnaud GAND
>SETI Ingénérie Conseil - Le DORAT
>tel 05 55 60 65 59
>fax 05 55 60 67 02


--
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/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-12-07 14:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-11-20 12:47 apiic
2001-11-20 17:46 ` Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)
2001-11-30  9:01   ` Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)
     [not found]   ` <3C0CC905.2000806@apiic.info>
2001-12-07  6:59     ` Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) [this message]
2001-11-30  1:30 ` apiic

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=4.3.1.2.20011207094137.02363cd0@pop.ma.ultranet.com \
    --to=lhall@rfk.com \
    --cc=arnaud@apiic.info \
    --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).