I did a defrag before my tests, so that's not it. I'm currently running a test to see that if it's AntiVirus software. In my preliminary tests, turning it off momentarily made the process a lot quicker.
I'll report back when I've got some real evidence :) -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog Work: http://www.multitask.com.au news <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 12/01/2003 09:52:28 AM: > One thing that improved performance for me was defragmenting. > Such is practically unheard of in the Linux world...but Microsoft > finally caved and admitted their favorite filesystem fragments like a > mutha. (Which seemed obvious to me from the technical info I saw on it)... > > -Andy > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Any ideas on my performance issues under Win2k? > > -- > > dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting > > Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog > > Work: http://www.multitask.com.au > > > > > > Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/01/2003 06:28:41 AM: > > > > > >>Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > >> > >>>Ant files are XML and transforming to them seems to be more natural. > >> > > Ant > > > >>>isn't the most kind thing in the world for its "Hey this crap broke" > >>>messages, but it is FAR better than cmd.exe or bash in this respect. > >> > >>Costin already started something along these lines: > >> > >>http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-gump/stylesheet/ant-build.xsl > >> > >> > >>>Anyhow, I'm just curious what problems there are with this approach. > >> > > As > > > >>>my level of pain increases I'll probably experiment with this, but I'm > >> > > > >>>curious if others have thought of this and what the downsides are... > >> > >>That may be a value use case for a large portion of the portion of the > >>potential "marketplace" for gump. > >> > >>Issues: > >> > >>* I want to fully bootstrap. In my case, I want to build ant from > >>source and use that version later in the build. > >> > >>* I want to be able to easily reproduce problems outside of the > >>environment generated by Gump. Many times I've found it handy to be > >>able to send somebody a shell script or a batch file along with a set of > > > > > >>jars to reproduce a problem that they are *sure* must be Gump's fault. > >> > >>* Leaky abstractions. I've always found ant calling ant to be > >>confusing, particularly when it comes to what properties can be passed > >>and what can be modified. But that may just be me. > >> > >>* Modifying JDK levels and/or bootclasspath. A persistent requirement > >>(despite never having been implemented, so take it with a grain of salt) > > > > > >>is to do a build with different portions of the build at different JDK > >>levels. What is a real requirement, however, is the ability to modify > >>the bootclasspath between job steps. > >> > >>All presented merely as food for thought. They reasons may or may not > >>be applicable to you. But there is no reason why Gump can't support > >>multiple targets - it already does so with bash and win2k. > >> > >>- Sam Ruby > >> > >> > >>-- > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > > > >>ForwardSourceID:NT000A1AE6 > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ForwardSourceID:NT000A1EBE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
