Hi, On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > > > I wonder what the difference is between NO_MMAP=Yes and NO_MMAP= > > > on Windows. > > Cygwin: > > real 0m0.812s > > and > > real 0m2.094s > > > > IOW, the numbers are slightly worse (!) than with mmap(). > > Slightly? That's double the time! Nope. What I meant is this: rev-list takes 0.8s without NO_MMAP, while it takes 0.75s with NO_MMAP, and similarly log takes 2.09s without NO_MMAP, while it takes 2.065 with NO_MMAP. > > MinGW does not even have mmap(). > > But Windows has something almost there. Yeah, CreateFile(). Very intuitive name. > I just read a flame war thread about implementing mmap in libiberty for > MinGW by stealing source from Cygwin, and how the FSF might feel about > someone's dirty feet after playing rugby. ;-) > Yea... Google is good. :) Well, I had _horrible_ results in the last two weeks, slowly getting better. Ciao, Dscho - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Wed Jan 31 03:50:22 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2007-01-31 03:52:23 EST