Curious - why Cygwin Bash so much faster in rxvt than Windows CLI?

[Randall R Schulz]

Steve,

I ran another test with a different font in RXVT, and got very different 
results:

New RXVT test:
...\rxvt.exe -g 120x91+853+0 -bg #000055 -fg #eeeeee -fn "Andale Mono-12" 
-sr -sl 5000 -vb -e /bin/bash --login -i

% time ls -lR /
real    0m32.422s
user    0m5.920s
sys     0m21.781s

% tsize
rows 92; columns 120

(Note that I invoke rxvt requesting a 91-line-high window and get a 92 
line-high window. This off-by-one always happens to me with RXVT, for 
whatever reason--see below.)


Previous RXVT test:
...\rxvt.exe -g 120x99+732+0 -bg #000055 -fg #eeeeee -fn "Lucida 
Console-11" -sr -sl 5000 -vb -e /bin/bash --login -i

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m33.360s
user    0m6.765s
sys     0m31.561s

% tsize
rows 100; columns 120


Previous Windows Character Subsystem window:
...\bash.exe --login -i

% time ls -lR /
<lots of elided output>
real    1m27.782s
user    0m7.296s
sys     0m23.608s

% tsize
rows 93; columns 120


In the previous test, the windows were nearly the same size (in pixels). In 
the second case the choice of font yielded a closer match to the character 
cell dimensions of the Windows Character Subsystem window, but the RXVT 
window size in pixels was about 15% narrower and the Character window. In 
all cases, the windows very nearly (or exactly) filled the screen's 1200 
vertical pixels less a double-high "bar" (single-height taskbar + 
single-height quick-launch bar).

Performance measurement is _never_ simple or straightforward!

Randall


At 19:33 2001-07-13, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
>There may not be a real performance effect, but there is a definitely 
>perceptible latency.  You see it, right?  I'm glad to know it's not 
>actually interfering with processes, though.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/