2.1.0 bzr performance under Cygwin

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jari Aalto wrote:
> An example:
> 
>     $ time python -V
>     Python 2.5.2
> 
>     real    0m0.208s
>     user    0m0.030s
>     sys     0m0.125s
> 
> 
>     $ time { bzr init; touch 1; bzr add 1; bzr ci -m add ; }
>     Created a standalone tree (format: 2a)
>     adding 1
> 
>     real    0m7.623s
>     user    0m1.778s
>     sys     0m4.215s
> 
>     $ time bzr init
>     Created a standalone tree (format: 2a)
> 
>     real    0m2.500s
>     user    0m0.796s
>     sys     0m1.374s
> 
>     $ time bzr add 1
>     adding 1
> 
>     real    0m2.011s
>     user    0m0.639s
>     sys     0m1.202s
> 
>     $ bzr ci -m add
> 
>     real    0m2.499s
>     user    0m0.702s
>     sys     0m1.436s
> 
> The startup of bzr takes quite a much time for each commands. If there
> is a way obtain detailed profiling results, let me know how can I help.
> 
> Jari
> 

The best I've found is to... not use the cygwin version of bzr. Python
already has higher startup overhead on Windows than on Linux (like 500ms
vs <100ms to startup bzr on the same hardware), and cygwin just makes
that a whole lot worse (IIRC >1000ms startup time).

I use cygwin as my shell, and the native bzr client, which works almost
all the time. (It doesn't support ~ expansion, symlinks or the
executable bit, but those haven't been necessary for me.)

I certainly wish I could say "do this" and python on cygwin wouldn't be
so slow. But I've never found any solution for it.

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkubqT4ACgkQJdeBCYSNAANddQCffSf/ieG+KNbEcGZY0UmfoLyN
Ta0AoM5kmf4jMN3nczx5rv4bGPP2RpOI
=Wd4e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----