On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 10:31:01AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 10:09:55PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: >>Also, the argument brought up on the findutils mailing list was that >>beyond a certain size, the cost of processing each argument starts to >>outweigh the benefits of forking fewer tasks, to the point that the >>difference between a 32k ARG_MAX vs. a 1M ARG_MAX falls in the noise >>when the same amount of data is divided by xargs to as few runs as >>possible, so a 32k limit is not really penalizing cygwin apps. > >If this is really true, then the findutils configury should be >attempting some kind of timing which finds that magic point where it >should be ignoring _SC_ARG_MAX. It shouldn't be vaguely assuming that >it is in its best interests to ignore it because someone thinks that the >cost of processing each argument outweighs the benefits of forking fewer >tests. tasks
cgf