RE: Curious - why Cygwin Bash so much faster in rxvt than Windows CLI?

RE: Curious - why Cygwin Bash so much faster in rxvt than Windows CLI?

[Steve Jorgensen]

There may not be a real performance effect, but there is a definitely 
perceptible latency.  You see it, right?  I'm glad to know it's not 
actually interfering with processes, though.

-----Original Message-----
From:	Randall R Schulz [SMTP:rrschulz@cris.com]
Sent:	Friday, July 13, 2001 7:23 PM
To:	jorgens@coho.net; Cygwin List (E-mail)
Subject:	Re: Curious - why Cygwin Bash so much faster in rxvt than Windows 
CLI?

Steve,

 From BASH in a Windows Character Subsystem window:

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m27.782s
user    0m7.296s
sys     0m23.608s

% tsize
rows 93; columns 120


 From BASH in RXVT:

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m33.360s
user    0m6.765s
sys     0m31.561s

% tsize
rows 100; columns 120


% time ll -lR / |wc
   20812  173469 1309196

real    0m29.375s
user    0m5.982s
sys     0m23.169s


In both cases the window was unobstructed. I have a Matrox G400 MAX.

It's evident visually that the scrolling algorithm is somehow different,
though I can't say how, really.

Nonetheless, there isn't much real difference in performance, at leat on my 
system.

Randall Schulz


At 18:56 2001-07-13, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
>The subject kind of says it all.  The Windows command processor runs 
plenty
>fast in the Windows CLI, but Cygwin Bash output crawls.  On the other 
hand,
>Cygwin Bash runs screaming fast in rxvt.  I'm impressed with the rxvt 
speed
>- the W libraries must be pretty efficient.


--
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/

RE: Curious - why Cygwin Bash so much faster in rxvt than Windows CLI?

[Randall R Schulz]

Steve,

I ran another test with a different font in RXVT, and got very different 
results:

New RXVT test:
...\rxvt.exe -g 120x91+853+0 -bg #000055 -fg #eeeeee -fn "Andale Mono-12" 
-sr -sl 5000 -vb -e /bin/bash --login -i

% time ls -lR /
real    0m32.422s
user    0m5.920s
sys     0m21.781s

% tsize
rows 92; columns 120

(Note that I invoke rxvt requesting a 91-line-high window and get a 92 
line-high window. This off-by-one always happens to me with RXVT, for 
whatever reason--see below.)


Previous RXVT test:
...\rxvt.exe -g 120x99+732+0 -bg #000055 -fg #eeeeee -fn "Lucida 
Console-11" -sr -sl 5000 -vb -e /bin/bash --login -i

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m33.360s
user    0m6.765s
sys     0m31.561s

% tsize
rows 100; columns 120


Previous Windows Character Subsystem window:
...\bash.exe --login -i

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m27.782s
user    0m7.296s
sys     0m23.608s

% tsize
rows 93; columns 120


In the previous test, the windows were nearly the same size (in pixels). In 
the second case the choice of font yielded a closer match to the character 
cell dimensions of the Windows Character Subsystem window, but the RXVT 
window size in pixels was about 15% narrower and the Character window. In 
all cases, the windows very nearly (or exactly) filled the screen's 1200 
vertical pixels less a double-high "bar" (single-height taskbar + 
single-height quick-launch bar).

Performance measurement is _never_ simple or straightforward!

Randall


At 19:33 2001-07-13, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
>There may not be a real performance effect, but there is a definitely 
>perceptible latency.  You see it, right?  I'm glad to know it's not 
>actually interfering with processes, though.


--
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/

Re: Curious - why Cygwin Bash so much faster in rxvt than Windows CLI?

[Randall R Schulz]

Steve,

 From BASH in a Windows Character Subsystem window:

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m27.782s
user    0m7.296s
sys     0m23.608s

% tsize
rows 93; columns 120


 From BASH in RXVT:

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m33.360s
user    0m6.765s
sys     0m31.561s

% tsize
rows 100; columns 120


% time ll -lR / |wc
   20812  173469 1309196

real    0m29.375s
user    0m5.982s
sys     0m23.169s


In both cases the window was unobstructed. I have a Matrox G400 MAX.

It's evident visually that the scrolling algorithm is somehow different, 
though I can't say how, really.

Nonetheless, there isn't much real difference in performance, at leat on my 
system.

Randall Schulz


At 18:56 2001-07-13, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
>The subject kind of says it all.  The Windows command processor runs plenty
>fast in the Windows CLI, but Cygwin Bash output crawls.  On the other hand,
>Cygwin Bash runs screaming fast in rxvt.  I'm impressed with the rxvt speed
>- the W libraries must be pretty efficient.


--
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/

Curious - why Cygwin Bash so much faster in rxvt than Windows CLI?

[Steve Jorgensen]

The subject kind of says it all.  The Windows command processor runs plenty 
fast in the Windows CLI, but Cygwin Bash output crawls.  On the other hand, 
Cygwin Bash runs screaming fast in rxvt.  I'm impressed with the rxvt speed 
- the W libraries must be pretty efficient.

--
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/