Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict

2004-10-14 Thread Dick Repasky
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?)

2004-10-14 Thread Owen Rees
--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

2004-10-13 Thread Dick Repasky
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?)

2004-10-12 Thread Jack Tanner
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

2004-10-10 Thread Christopher Faylor
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

2004-10-10 Thread Philip Gladstone
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 (fixed in snapshot?)

2004-10-10 Thread Christopher Faylor
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

2004-10-07 Thread Jack Tanner
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

2004-10-06 Thread Dick Repasky
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

2004-10-06 Thread Jack Tanner
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

2004-10-06 Thread Philip Gladstone
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

2004-10-06 Thread Christopher Faylor
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

2004-10-05 Thread Armbrust, Daniel C.
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

2004-10-04 Thread Dick Repasky
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

2004-10-04 Thread Jack Tanner
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

2004-10-01 Thread 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: [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

2004-09-30 Thread Alexander Gottwald
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


Re: cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict

2004-09-30 Thread Jack Tanner
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.



cygwin/x symantec antivirus conflict

2004-09-28 Thread Jack Tanner
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.
1. Establish remote connection using ssh inside an xterm running under 
Cygwin/X.
2. Hold down a key (b) and let go (b). Way 
too many letters get buffered, because there's some sort of delay in 
transmitting the keypresses.
3. Disable Symantec Antivirus Auto-Protect (via systray applet).
4. Do the keypress test again, and there's no delay.
5. Enable Symantec Antivirus Auto-Protect
6. Do the keypress test again, and the delay is back.

Is anyone else running Symantec Antivirus? Is anyone else seeing similar 
slowdowns?

Thanks!