Hi,

On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Johannes Sixt wrote:

quoted text
> Kjetil Barvik schrieb:
> >   And, yes, since each lstat() call cost approximately 44 microseconds
> >   compared to 12-16 for each lstat() on my Linux box, there was a little
>                                ^^^^^^^ fstat()?
> >   performance gain from this patch.
> 
> This does look like a good gain. But do you have hard numbers that back
> the claim?
> 
> If you can squeeze out a 10% improvement on Linux with this patch, we
> should take it, and if it turns out that it doesn't work on Windows, we
> could trivially throw in an #ifdef MINGW (or even #ifdef WIN32 if Cygwin
> is affected, too) that skips the fstat() optimization.

Of course, what we _really_ would do is to provide a flag, say, 
FSTAT_UNRELIABLE and test for _that_ (after defining it in the Makefile 
for the appropriate platforms).

Ciao,
Dscho

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html