Re: MinGW port usable

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jan 30, 2007, 16:12 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0701301708160.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <20070130155653.GB25950@spearce.org>

Hi,

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> > > Just curious, but were these tests run with mmap(), or NO_MMAP?
> > 
> > Both with NO_MMAP=YesPlease.
> 
> I wonder what the difference is between NO_MMAP=Yes and NO_MMAP=
> on Windows.

Cygwin:

	$ time git-rev-list next >/dev/null

	real    0m0.812s
	user    0m0.358s
	sys     0m0.203s

	$ time git-rev-list next >/dev/null

	real    0m0.797s
	user    0m0.358s
	sys     0m0.234s

	$ time git-rev-list next >/dev/null

	real    0m0.845s
	user    0m0.390s
	sys     0m0.265s

and

	$ time git-log next >/dev/null

	real    0m2.094s
	user    0m0.718s
	sys     0m1.077s

	$ time git-log next >/dev/null

	real    0m2.078s
	user    0m0.718s
	sys     0m1.062s

	$ time git-log next >/dev/null

	real    0m2.124s
	user    0m0.796s
	sys     0m1.046s

IOW, the numbers are slightly worse (!) than with mmap().

MinGW does not even have mmap().

Ciao, Dscho