I reran the bookstrap under "time". Subtract a little from the totals
to account for my response times to answer questions posed by
auto-pkgsrc-setup. Also note that auto-pkgsrc-setup times include
creating a boostrap kit with both the source tree and installation
directories.
WSL: ~104 minutes total, 16 minutes just to unpack.
FreeBSD running under HyperV: 21:47 total
Unpacking was quite slow under HyperV as well, but GNU configured
scripts whizzed along at about native speed, on the order of a dozen
checks / sec vs ~1 / sec under WSL. Compiles were much faster in the
VM than in WSL as well.
I would hypothesize that WSL has a fork() bottleneck similar to Cygwin.
I suspect your much bigger RAM pool might explain some of the better
performance on your end.
On 05/27/18 09:34, Chavdar Ivanov wrote:
It is an Intel Core i7-6700HQ@2.6GHz, 16GB memory, SanDisk
SD7SN6S-512GB SSD(SATA), running build 17134.81 (v. 1803, a.k.a. the
April update). Perhaps my expectations were not very high, I didn't
measure the time taken precisely enough, but it seemed the extraction
took most of the time. I have since tried to run some benchmarks;
couldn't wait for filebench to complete (maybe I've selected the
wrong configuration, but I suspect it was worse than that), bonnie++
ran though, with a result which seemed to me the reverse to what is
in that discussion - it completed much faster when the work directory
was /mnt/c/Temp than when it was just /tmp. The resulting figures
were not conclusive - some of the metrics favoured /tmp, some -
/mnt/c/Temp, e.g. random file deletion was much faster when crossing
the /mnt boundary.
The discussion in that thread was quite illuminating with respect to
the problems Microsoft developers have with WSL, and, to be honest,
it would be harsh to expect much more. It, after all, was thought of
as a means of keeping developers stay with Windows while using a
number of open source technologies, not for actual deployment in the
wild.
Chavdar
On Sun, 27 May 2018 at 15:02 Jason Bacon <outpaddling%yahoo.com@localhost
<mailto:outpaddling%yahoo.com@localhost>> wrote:
What are your hardware specs? I suspect you have both a faster
machine
and more patience than I do.
I agree that WSL and Cygwin are fast enough for many purposes.
wouldn't want to build gcc under WSL on the machine I have, though.
For comparison, I ran auto-pkgsrc-setup on 3 identical machines
running
different Unix OSs. These are old PowerEdge 1920 servers, 4-core
Xeon
5160 3.0GHz, 16G RAM.
CentOS MD-RAID mirror 6:16
FreeBSD Root-on-ZFS 5:57
NetBSD PERC RAID 12:56 (I'd like to know what the
bottleneck was here, I'd expect NetBSD to be on par with the others)
zile build on NetBSD 7:10
....