Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-21 Thread Achim Gratz
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-21 Thread William M. (Mike) Miller
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-21 Thread Achim Gratz
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

RE: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-21 Thread Bill Smith
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

RE: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-21 Thread Bill Smith
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-21 Thread Achim Gratz
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-21 Thread Achim Gratz
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. >

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-22 Thread Corinna Vinschen
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.

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-22 Thread Achim Gratz
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-23 Thread Corinna Vinschen
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-25 Thread Lemke, Michael ST/HZA-ZIC2
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-25 Thread Achim Gratz
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

Re: Performance of "ls -F"

2016-01-25 Thread Corinna Vinschen
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