From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24143: 25.1; Windows performace of process-send-string Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 17:57:47 +0300 Message-ID: <83zioslgyc.fsf@gnu.org> References: <601571075.10415562.1470227331338.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <601571075.10415562.1470227331338.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <8337mln6zt.fsf@gnu.org> <333655155.11634740.1470310820582.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1470322765 28912 195.159.176.226 (4 Aug 2016 14:59:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 14:59:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 24143-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Bogdan Sirb Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 04 16:59:20 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK7C-0006cn-KM for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 16:59:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40324 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK79-00059K-GF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:59:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57172) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK71-00053j-A4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:59:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK6x-0003O6-3a for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:59:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58465) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK6x-0003Nx-0b for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:59:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK6w-0005g7-Qu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:59:02 -0400 Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 14:59:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 24143 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: notabug Mail-Followup-To: 24143@debbugs.gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, bogdans91@yahoo.com Original-Received: via spool by 24143-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D24143.147032269721764 (code D ref 24143); Thu, 04 Aug 2016 14:59:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24143-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Aug 2016 14:58:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55760 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK6D-0005ey-GO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:58:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37802) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK6B-0005ek-DC for 24143-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:58:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK63-0003CC-9b for 24143-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:58:10 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:36016) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK5u-0003B0-K7; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:57:58 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4217 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bVK5s-0001mu-Lu; Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:57:57 -0400 In-reply-to: <333655155.11634740.1470310820582.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> (message from Bogdan Sirb on Thu, 4 Aug 2016 11:40:20 +0000 (UTC)) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:121825 Archived-At: tags 24143 + notabug thanks > Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 11:40:20 +0000 (UTC) > From: Bogdan Sirb > Cc: "24143@debbugs.gnu.org" <24143@debbugs.gnu.org> > > Emacs 24.5 was the one found in the repository of msys2 found > https://msys2.github.io/ I also tried the standard one found on emacs website > and the results were the same. That doesn't tell how it was compiled. My idea was that when comparing performance of two versions, one should make sure both builds used similar compilation switches, otherwise you could see all kinds of strange disparities. > But doing a (setq w32-pipe-buffer-size (* 10 4096)) fixed the problem. Great, so I'm closing this bug. > Now I have the following: > > * emacs 24.5: 0.037496 > * emacs 25.1: 0.040418 > > But, if I'm doing a (setq w32-pipe-buffer-size (point-max)) to send the whole > file at once once, I get a stunning 0.0010007 per call. > > Is there any implications to doing this ? It depends on what program is on the other end of the pipe. Some programs don't like large writes down the pipe. See bug#22344, where such large writes caused a catastrophic failure. Emacs prefers to err on the safe side by default, and leave any fine-tuning of the pipe size to applications that need it. Thanks.