On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Greg Freemyer <greg.freem...@gmail.com> wrote: > As I test, I just copied 30 GB of 1.5 GB files via robocopy. None of > the files had been accessed since a reboot, so none should have been > in cache. > > According to Resource Monitor, yes. > > I'm getting about 105 MB/sec for read and 105 MB/sec for write vs 70 > MB/sec for rsync.
I just moved both drives to a Linux box. Using the same rsync command I'm getting 85 - 90 MB/sec. That linux box is a 5-year old laptop, where as the windows box is a pretty beefy box. (6 cores, 64 GB ram) Clearly the WIndows box should be better performing and when running robocopy it is. So it seems something about the combination of a Windows kernel, cygwin, and rsync is dropping my performance at least a factor 20% and maybe as much as 35%. If I were to run rsync in strace, would anyone want to try and work on the performance issue? Or should it just be chalked up to rsync being optimized for a linux kernel? Thanks Greg -- Greg Freemyer www.IntelligentAvatar.net -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple