On 24/05/2022 09:25, Csaba Raduly wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2022 at 20:47, Lee wrote: >> >> On 5/22/22, David Christensen <dpchr...@holgerdanske.com> wrote: >>> On 5/21/22 10:55, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote: >>>> Am 18.05.2022 um 03:53 schrieb David Christensen: >>>> >>>> > 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 >>>> >>>> Given the complete lack of information about what that Perl module of >>>> yours might be doing, that's hard to have a meaningful discussion about. >>> >>> >>> Thank you for the response. I was hoping there was a known issue. >>> Apparently, not. >> >> What I consider a well known issue is that process start up time is >> _very_ slow. If your 'make test' starts lots of processes that could >> be a problem. >> > > While Cygwin''s fork emulation is indeed slow (I once measured 1000:1 > between Cygwin and Linux * ), > "make test" likely started roughly the same number of processes "then" > as it does "now". > In which case the increase in the run time could be attributed to Cygwin.
Indeed. But perhaps what the Cygwin core and/or Cygwin Perl maintainers need is a simple test case Perl script that can be shown to be much slower on the current releases than it was on a named earlier pair of releases. And maybe some testing by the original poster to see if it is the Cygwin or Perl release change that causes the issue. Anecdotal observations do not an issue report make. ;-) -- Sam Edge -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
