From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mr5.vodafonemail.de (mr5.vodafonemail.de [145.253.228.165]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 149AD385C3C1 for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 18:57:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 149AD385C3C1 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nexgo.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nexgo.de Received: from smtp.vodafone.de (unknown [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mr5.vodafonemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4L73N92lykz1yF0 for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 18:57:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nexgo.de; s=vfde-smtpout-mb-15sep; t=1653418633; bh=O/jVNLLyTSjejq+Riwfx0r1ncteA8llz9rCZ8oxbIgM=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:User-Agent:Date:Message-ID: Content-Type:From; b=UTW2wCgb72rX5jSjHtczHbrq8DO92PHslPD5zizKzd+1fquRt7RoSYhnLVO7k+QrQ vhM5q/5OOJ1Ih7vtQhvijG795G5FiI47L+PA1gzqwg0MfAvMTRqxOVV7ZTxCVw9Vvj +Wh/Asq4pZAauSuxljSVJTqCyain7mRSKy/LQ18M= Received: from Gertrud (p57b9d5eb.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.185.213.235]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.vodafone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4L73N80hcxz9vd0 for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 18:57:08 +0000 (UTC) From: Achim Gratz To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cygwin Perl has slowed in recent months In-Reply-To: <9a24b87b-e71d-9371-5d78-2b0f160adacd@holgerdanske.com> (David Christensen's message of "Tue, 17 May 2022 18:53:48 -0700") References: <9a24b87b-e71d-9371-5d78-2b0f160adacd@holgerdanske.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 20:57:01 +0200 Message-ID: <874k1eyd1e.fsf@Rainer.invalid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-purgate-type: clean X-purgate: clean X-purgate-size: 2461 X-purgate-ID: 155817::1653418632-0000047F-77D2D420/0/0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3031.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 18:57:17 -0000 David Christensen writes: > I have a computer: > > 2022-05-17 18:46:12 dpchrist@dht4s3r1 ~/src/perl/Dpchrist-Perl > $ systeminfo | egrep '^OS (Name|Version)' ; uname -a ; cygcheck -c cygwin > OS Name: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional > OS Version: 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 Build 7601 > CYGWIN_NT-6.1 dht4s3r1 3.3.5(0.341/5/3) 2022-05-13 12:27 x86_64 Cygwin > Cygwin Package Information > Package Version Status > cygwin 3.3.5-1 OK Nothing of which tells me very much, except that you're using a Windows version that is out of support. None of what you show is likely to explain the problem you're seeing, though. > I am working on a Perl module that runs on various Unix-like > platforms. When I 'make test' on similar computers: > > FreeBSD 12.3-RELEASE 28 wallclock secs > Debian GNU/Linux 11.3 31 wallclock secs > macOS 11.6.2 36 wallclock secs > Windows 7 / Cygwin 3.3.5-1 509 wallclock secs Which again gives no usable information. > A few months ago, I seem to recall that Cygwin was about 4 times > slower. Now it is over 14 times slower. So what's the difference between the two environments other than "a few months"? Cygwin Perl was last updated in August 2021 and there haven't been any changes in how fast it builds and tests modules that I have been able to detect since (or even compared to the previous version of Perl). A slowdown of at least a factor of three (based on your vague assertion above) would have been noticed quickly as I compare both the results and the build/test times for each package build I do. The build times on the CI (for the same package across the last two or three years) independently confirm that observation. Note that this also rules out a general slowdown in compilation speed (both gcc and binutils did get updates in this timeframe). However, I can not rule out that different choice of defaults and/or changes in the optimization engines could have had the effect you're seeing in very specific instances. > Is this expected? If not, how do I find the bottleneck? It seems you're the only one who can provide the information necessary to make that determination. Regards, Achim. -- +<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+ Wavetables for the Waldorf Blofeld: http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#BlofeldUserWavetables