Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: You're welcome. What OS are you using XP, Me, etc.? XP SP2 and Symantec Corporate version 9 running under VMWare on a 3 GHz Linux machine (up-to-date gentoo) with 1 GB mem. My standard test is to log into a remote machine and launch SAS interactively, which opens up 5 or 6 windows. - Dick Repasky Bioinformatics Support UITS Cubicle 101.08 Indiana University USA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict (fixed in snapshot?)
--On 11 October 2004 00:06 -0400 Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, I'd appreciate reports on the latest snapshot. Does it fix any problems? Cause any problems? No change? I have XP Pro and Symantec AV - the 20041010 snapshot fixes the slowness I was having with emacs/X locally and X forwarded over SSH, and with no problems observed so far. The severe performance problems appeared some time in August IIRC, and my first impression is that the performance is now better than before the problems. Regards, Owen Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK tel: +44 117 312 9439 fax: +44 117 312 9153
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote: Would you mind trying a new snapshot? The snapshot is terrific. What took several minutes before now takes 10 seconds. Thanks! Dick - Dick Repasky Bioinformatics Support UITS Cubicle 101.08 Indiana University USA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict (fixed in snapshot?)
Christopher Faylor wrote: For those who haven't been following along at home, it looks like a change I just made to select() may solve the dreaded "slows down to a crawl with Symantec AntiVirus" problem. This may also improve the performance of things that use sockets slightly. So, I'd appreciate reports on the latest snapshot. Does it fix any problems? Cause any problems? No change? Wow! Using the 2004-10-10 snapshot, I'm experiencing an ubelievable speed improvement. The typing delay as well as the remote X apps drawing delays are gone. In addition, I confirm that openssh with X forwarding and Cygwin/X are both functioning as they should. cgf and Philip, thank you immensely.
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict (fixed in snapshot?)
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 11:33:00PM -0400, Philip Gladstone wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >>Ok. I've changed the algorithm in select. It only opens a DGRAM >>socket now, one time per thread. It uses this to terminate the socket >>thread, if necessary. This socket is never closed until the thread >>terminates. >> >>It sounds like this would more or less fix the problem that you're >>seeing. Would you mind trying a new snapshot? >> >>http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ > >This fixes it for me! Thanks immensely. That's good news! Thanks for the fast feedback. I've cc'ed the cygwin mailing list since this has been a long standing problem. For those who haven't been following along at home, it looks like a change I just made to select() may solve the dreaded "slows down to a crawl with Symantec AntiVirus" problem. This may also improve the performance of things that use sockets slightly. So, I'd appreciate reports on the latest snapshot. Does it fix any problems? Cause any problems? No change? In this one case, I'd like to hear "me toos" since the change was to a fundamental part of cygwin and it is in socket code, which has proved to be problematic. So, I'd like to know if things still work on Windows 9x and all flavors of NT. http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ "Things" would be, openssh, telnet, ftp, rsync, etc. Anything which uses sockets or communicates via TCP/IP. I've reset the reply-to for this message to the cygwin mailing list, so if there is further Cygwin/X discussion necessary, please make sure that it goes to the cygwin-xfree mailing list. cgf
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
Christopher Faylor wrote: Ok. I've changed the algorithm in select. It only opens a DGRAM socket now, one time per thread. It uses this to terminate the socket thread, if necessary. This socket is never closed until the thread terminates. It sounds like this would more or less fix the problem that you're seeing. Would you mind trying a new snapshot? http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ This fixes it for me! Thanks immensely. Philip -- Philip Gladstone * Check out the live pondcam at http://pond.gladstonefamily.net smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 09:40:38AM -0400, Philip Gladstone wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >><>On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 10:36:22PM -0400, Philip Gladstone wrote: >>>The slowness that I see with Symantec Antivirus is due to the 'select' >>>emulation in cygwin. Whenever XWin.exe does a select (which is nearly >>>all the time), the select emulation creates a new thread, creates a new >>>TCP socket and then connects to it. I suspect that the Symantec firewall >>>is getting in the picture here and making this a very slow operation. >> >>Cygwin should not be actually creating threads in this scenario. It >>should be reusing thread from a thread pool. >> >>If there are a lot of sockets being waited on (which doesn't seem to >>be the case here) then the pool could be exhausted and new threads could >>be created. If that was the issue then we could bump up the size of >>the thread pool. > >It doesn't seem to the be the cost of creating the thread, but creating >the socket. Ok. I've changed the algorithm in select. It only opens a DGRAM socket now, one time per thread. It uses this to terminate the socket thread, if necessary. This socket is never closed until the thread terminates. It sounds like this would more or less fix the problem that you're seeing. Would you mind trying a new snapshot? http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ cgf
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
OK, so maybe it's not just Symantec that's causing the problem. I've turned off auto-protect, and a remote emacs still takes far too long to draw. (But with auto-protect enabled, it takes longer still.) Is there some profiling I could do, or a debug build I could run that would help isolate a culprit?
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 10:36:22PM -0400, Philip Gladstone wrote: >Alexander Gottwald wrote: >>Jack Tanner wrote: >>>A while back I mentioned I was experiencing slowdowns under X. >>>http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2004-09/msg00010.html >>> >>>I think the slowdowns may have to do with Symantec Antivirus. >>> >The slowness that I see with Symantec Antivirus is due to the 'select' >emulation in cygwin. Whenever XWin.exe does a select (which is nearly >all the time), the select emulation creates a new thread, creates a new >TCP socket and then connects to it. I suspect that the Symantec firewall >is getting in the picture here and making this a very slow operation. Cygwin should not be actually creating threads in this scenario. It should be reusing thread from a thread pool. If there are a lot of sockets being waited on (which doesn't seem to be the case here) then the pool could be exhausted and new threads could be created. If that was the issue then we could bump up the size of the thread pool. -- Christopher Faylor spammer? -> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cygwin Co-Project Leader[EMAIL PROTECTED] TimeSys, Inc.
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
Alexander Gottwald wrote: Jack Tanner wrote: A while back I mentioned I was experiencing slowdowns under X. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2004-09/msg00010.html I think the slowdowns may have to do with Symantec Antivirus. The slowness that I see with Symantec Antivirus is due to the 'select' emulation in cygwin. Whenever XWin.exe does a select (which is nearly all the time), the select emulation creates a new thread, creates a new TCP socket and then connects to it. I suspect that the Symantec firewall is getting in the picture here and making this a very slow operation. I looked at the select emulation code and decided that it was too complex to make a general purpose improvement. However, it might well be possible to recognize the case of waiting on one or more network connections and the keyboard/mouse, and handle that case efficiently. My feeling is that this would make a huge improvement in performance. Philip -- Philip Gladstone * Check out the live pondcam at http://pond.gladstonefamily.net
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
Dick Repasky wrote: I'm running Symantec 9.0.0.1400 with scan engine 1.2.0.13. Same as me. The two people that said they weren't having problems were running version 8.1.1.323 (Daniel) or 10.0.1.13 (Giampaolo). I think it's time to try an upgrade or a downgrade. I haven't tried it with rxvt rather than xterm. I don't have rxvt installed. rxvt is easily available through Cygwin Setup. The perplexing thing is that nothing seems to be taxed. Processor load, paging, and network all seem normal. Nothing strange appears in the process table if I watch it while running xterm, logging in to the remote machine and while forwarding X windows. Same here. Do you by any chance have Exceed or any other X server? I've posted a question about this on the Symantec tech support site: http://tinyurl.com/4pf3d
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, Jack Tanner wrote: Dick, what versions of Symantec Antivirus and scan enginge are you running? Do you get the delay if you're typing into a local shell? Do you get the delay if you're typing into a remote ssh-connected shell, but running under a local rxvt binary instead of xterm? Jack, I'm running Symantec 9.0.0.1400 with scan engine 1.2.0.13. Yes, I get the delay in a local shell, and it seems to be worse after quitting an ssh connections that did X forwarding. Yes, I get it while using a remote shell via ssh. I haven't tried it with rxvt rather than xterm. I don't have rxvt installed. I agree that the problem has nothing to do with SP 2. I rebuilt a machine with XP, and everything worked fine. I put on SP 2 and Symantec at the same time and performance went to pot. I blamed SP 2 and uninstalled it. No change. I then rebuilt the machine from scratch without SP 2. No problem before Symantec. I put on Symantec, and the problem appeared. I removed it and the problem disappeared. The perplexing thing is that nothing seems to be taxed. Processor load, paging, and network all seem normal. Nothing strange appears in the process table if I watch it while running xterm, logging in to the remote machine and while forwarding X windows. Dick - Dick Repasky Bioinformatics Support UITS Cubicle 101.08 Indiana University USA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
I do see the problem with slow rendering of X-forwarded apps on one of my computers, and it does not have symmantec installed (it does have F-Prot antivirus installed, however) I have never figured out what is wrong with it... It used to work fine, and then I did an update at somepoint, and the slow behavior started. I just don't use it often enough on that computer to be inclined to troubleshoot it... Dan
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
Dick Repasky wrote: I, too, experience the problem, and the problem seems to depend on hardware. Thank you for letting me know that I'm not totally nuts. In addition to the keyboard delay, I too get slow rendering for X-forwarded apps. I can't imagine that this problem is due to the hardware. I'm experiencing it on a P4 2.4Ghz w/ 1GB RAM and a 100Mbit wired connection. Conversely, I've never encountered the problem on other, slower machines, over slower network connections w/ higher latency, all connecting to the same remote box. It's gotta be something else. For what it's worth, I'm attaching the output of ps -alW. I'm running WinXP SP2, and the problem used to happen under SP1 as well. If anyone sees anything that might be interacting with the network in an evil way, please tell me. Dick, what versions of Symantec Antivirus and scan enginge are you running? Do you get the delay if you're typing into a local shell? Do you get the delay if you're typing into a remote ssh-connected shell, but running under a local rxvt binary instead of xterm? PIDPPIDPGID WINPID TTY UIDSTIME COMMAND 4 0 0 4?0 15:24:48 *** unknown *** 1016 0 0 1016?0 Sep 28 \SystemRoot\System32\smss.exe 1124 0 0 1124?0 Sep 28 \??\C:\WINDOWS\system32\winlogon.exe 1168 0 0 1168?0 Sep 28 C:\WINDOWS\system32\services.exe 1180 0 0 1180?0 Sep 28 C:\WINDOWS\system32\lsass.exe 1336 0 0 1336?0 Sep 28 C:\WINDOWS\system32\svchost.exe 1488 0 0 1488?0 Sep 28 C:\WINDOWS\System32\svchost.exe 1716 0 0 1716?0 Sep 28 C:\Program Files\Common Files\Symantec Shared\ccEvtMgr.exe 1732 0 0 1732?0 Sep 28 C:\Program Files\Common Files\Symantec Shared\ccSetMgr.exe 1912 0 0 1912?0 Sep 28 C:\WINDOWS\system32\spoolsv.exe 220 0 0220?0 Sep 28 C:\Program Files\Symantec AntiVirus\DefWatch.exe 368 0 0368?0 Sep 28 C:\Program Files\Symantec AntiVirus\Rtvscan.exe 1152 0 0 1152?0 Sep 29 C:\WINDOWS\system32\svchost.exe 4052 0 0 4052?0 Oct 1 C:\WINDOWS\Explorer.EXE 948 0 0948?0 Oct 1 C:\Program Files\Common Files\Symantec Shared\ccApp.exe 2964 0 0 2964?0 Oct 1 C:\PROGRA~1\SYMANT~1\VPTray.exe 3264 0 0 3264?0 Oct 1 C:\WINDOWS\system32\NWTRAY.EXE 1672 0 0 1672?0 Oct 1 C:\Program Files\WinPortrait\wpctrl.exe 4092 0 0 4092?0 Oct 1 C:\Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_05\bin\jusched.exe 2680 0 0 2680?0 Oct 1 C:\WINDOWS\system32\ctfmon.exe 3828 0 0 3828?0 Oct 1 C:\Program Files\WinPortrait\floater.exe 740 0 0740?0 Oct 1 C:\PROGRA~1\MOZILL~2\THUNDE~1.EXE 4088 0 0 4088?0 Oct 3 C:\PROGRA~1\MOZILL~1\FIREFOX.EXE 3388 0 0 3388?0 19:09:17 C:\WINDOWS\system32\taskmgr.exe 1660 11660 1660 con 1003 19:24:36 /usr/X11R6/bin/XWin 3552 13552 3552 con 1003 19:24:36 /usr/bin/xterm 548 0 0548?0 19:24:40 C:\cygwin\bin\bash.exe 9083716 908 40240 1003 19:25:27 /usr/bin/ps 4024 0 0 4024?0 19:25:28 C:\cygwin\bin\ps.exe
RE: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
I, too, experience the problem, and the problem seems to depend on hardware. IBM Thinkpad 600x 500 MHz, 200 MB mem. I not only see the keyboard delay that Jack mentions, but I get terrible X forwarding. Without Symantec, I wait about 10 seconds for all SAS windows from a remote session to be displayed. With Symantec (although disk and network checking are de-activated) it takes just over a minute for the windows to be displayed. Even worse, if I run cygwin from a CD on this machine with Symantec installed, it takes 30 minutes for windows from a remote SAS session to be displayed, compared to about 20 seconds without Symantec. On a dual 3-GHz Xeon with 1 GB mem, I see no performance hit from Symantec while running cygwin from CD or not. Dick - Dick Repasky Bioinformatics Support UITS Cubicle 101.08 Indiana University USA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
I run version 10.0.1.13 and I have no problems. GP > From: Armbrust, Daniel C. > I have a corporate version of 8.1.1.323, and see no slowdowns. > > I didn't have to do anything special to make it work. > > (Helpful post huh?) > > Dan > > -Original Message- > From: Jack Tanner > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 5:05 PM > Subject: Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict > > Alexander Gottwald wrote: > > I'll add this to the FAQ. Does Symantec Antivirus has an option to > disable > > scanning for certain programs? > > > > Try adding XWin.exe to that list. > > Good idea, but no dice. I added the entire c:\cygwin\ tree to the > Symantec exclusion list, but the slowdown is still there. There's also > no difference if you disable network drive scanning, or something called > Threat Tracer (the purpose of TT is "Identify the source of network > share-based virus infections on computers that are running Windows > NT/2000/XP operating systems.") > > This really sucks. I don't want to run without antivirus protection, but > the delay is really irritating. > > Is anybody using Symantec Antivirus and NOT seeing a delay? If so, what > version of SA are you using? I have "full version 9.0.0.1400", scan > engine 1.2.0.13.
RE: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
I have a corporate version of 8.1.1.323, and see no slowdowns. I didn't have to do anything special to make it work. (Helpful post huh?) Dan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Tanner Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 5:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict Alexander Gottwald wrote: > I'll add this to the FAQ. Does Symantec Antivirus has an option to disable > scanning for certain programs? > > Try adding XWin.exe to that list. Good idea, but no dice. I added the entire c:\cygwin\ tree to the Symantec exclusion list, but the slowdown is still there. There's also no difference if you disable network drive scanning, or something called Threat Tracer (the purpose of TT is "Identify the source of network share-based virus infections on computers that are running Windows NT/2000/XP operating systems.") This really sucks. I don't want to run without antivirus protection, but the delay is really irritating. Is anybody using Symantec Antivirus and NOT seeing a delay? If so, what version of SA are you using? I have "full version 9.0.0.1400", scan engine 1.2.0.13.
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
Alexander Gottwald wrote: I'll add this to the FAQ. Does Symantec Antivirus has an option to disable scanning for certain programs? Try adding XWin.exe to that list. Good idea, but no dice. I added the entire c:\cygwin\ tree to the Symantec exclusion list, but the slowdown is still there. There's also no difference if you disable network drive scanning, or something called Threat Tracer (the purpose of TT is "Identify the source of network share-based virus infections on computers that are running Windows NT/2000/XP operating systems.") This really sucks. I don't want to run without antivirus protection, but the delay is really irritating. Is anybody using Symantec Antivirus and NOT seeing a delay? If so, what version of SA are you using? I have "full version 9.0.0.1400", scan engine 1.2.0.13.
Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict
Jack Tanner wrote: > A while back I mentioned I was experiencing slowdowns under X. > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2004-09/msg00010.html > > I think the slowdowns may have to do with Symantec Antivirus. I'll add this to the FAQ. Does Symantec Antivirus has an option to disable scanning for certain programs? Try adding XWin.exe to that list. bye ago NP: Robbie Williams - Straighten up and fly right -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
