I am finding a large performance gap between plain "ls" and "ls -F" in a
directory with many files on a network share (NetApp disguised as NTFS if
that matters). This has been there for quite a while, I've just now
realized what the reason was (I have "ls -F" as an alias for "ls" in my
interactive
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Achim Gratz wrote:
> I am finding a large performance gap between plain "ls" and "ls -F" in a
> directory with many files on a network share (NetApp disguised as NTFS if
> that matters). This has been there for quite a while, I've just now
> realized what the rea
William M. (Mike) Miller gmail.com> writes:
> The overhead appears to be in checking for executable files; using
> --file-type instead of -F, which just omits the '*' category, reduces
> the time for ls in one of my (local) large directories from over one
> second to 0.04 seconds.
Indeed. Thanks
e-
> From: cygwin-ow...@cygwin.com [mailto:cygwin-ow...@cygwin.com] On
> Behalf Of Achim Gratz
> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 10:45 AM
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: Performance of "ls -F"
>
> I am finding a large performance gap between plain "ls&q
nuary 21, 2016 10:53 AM
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: Performance of "ls -F"
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Achim Gratz
> wrote:
> > I am finding a large performance gap between plain "ls" and "ls -F" in
> > a directory
Bill Smith writes:
> Hi Achim,
> I'm also having this issue but my investigation has found it to be a
> behavior specific to C-DOT. This doesn't happen with 7mode. I
> currently have a support case open with NetApp to get to the bottom of
> this behavior. It could be a Cygwin bug.
Hmm. I have
Bill Smith progress.com> writes:
> The difference is 1.3 seconds versus 1 minute 7 seconds. The directory is
identical on the two NetApps and
> they both contain ~29K files. C-dot (Cluster Data On Tap) is the newest
operating system for the NetApp. It
> also supports the newer SMB protocols.
>
On Jan 22 07:30, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Bill Smith progress.com> writes:
> > The difference is 1.3 seconds versus 1 minute 7 seconds. The directory is
> identical on the two NetApps and
> > they both contain ~29K files. C-dot (Cluster Data On Tap) is the newest
> operating system for the NetApp.
Corinna Vinschen writes:
> Just a hint: ls -F requires to stat every single file. stat in turn
> requires to load not only the usual metadata but also to fetch the ACL
> and convert it to POSIX permissions.
The timings are from shares mounted with the noacl option, so that bit
of code shouldn't
On Jan 22 22:04, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> > Just a hint: ls -F requires to stat every single file. stat in turn
> > requires to load not only the usual metadata but also to fetch the ACL
> > and convert it to POSIX permissions.
>
> The timings are from shares mounted with
I just want to add an observation and stay out of this
conversation otherwise: ls -F is comparably slow on a
network drive here but as noted by someone else in this
thread ls --file-type is fast. However, the combination
ls --file-type --color is as slow as ls -F here. Maybe
a hint for you to fin
Corinna Vinschen cygwin.com> writes:
> In the noacl case, Cygwin tries to find out if files are scripts. It
> opens the file and checks the first two bytes in the file for a shebang
> (and other stuff).
acl > time ls --file-type > /dev/null
0.015u 0.015s 0:00.42 4.7% 0+0k 0+0io 2473pf+0w
ac
On Jan 25 11:02, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen cygwin.com> writes:
> > In the noacl case, Cygwin tries to find out if files are scripts. It
> > opens the file and checks the first two bytes in the file for a shebang
> > (and other stuff).
>
> acl > time ls --file-type > /dev/null
> 0.015
13 matches
Mail list logo