Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utah-gr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxn!mhuxm!mhuxj!houxm!whuxlm!akgua!mcnc!decvax!genrad!teddy!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!utah-cs!utah-gr!thomas
From: thomas@utah-gr.UUCP (Spencer W. Thomas)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Speed of read vs. fread
Message-ID: <1315@utah-gr.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-Jan-85 11:42:42 EST
Article-I.D.: utah-gr.1315
Posted: Wed Jan 23 11:42:42 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 28-Jan-85 06:14:01 EST
References: <626@ihlts.UUCP> <1350@hao.UUCP>
Reply-To: thomas@utah-gr.UUCP (Spencer W. Thomas)
Organization: Univ of Utah CS Dept
Lines: 19
Summary: 

In article <1350@hao.UUCP> pag@hao.UUCP (Peter Gross) writes:
>  Profiling showed it spent a great deal of
>time in fread()/fwrite().  We checked the code, and lo and behold, fread/fwrite
>do single getc/putc's in a loop.  Converting to read/write made the program
>run about 3 times faster.

This has been fixed! This has been fixed!  This has been fixed!  This
has been fixed!  This has been fixed!  This has been fixed!

Contact your best friend at Berkeley and see if you can get the fix.  As
described by Sam Leffler at the Salt Lake Usenix, almost all the
places where System V (and others) was more efficient than 4.2 have been
fixed (and most of these fixes were pretty trivial).  See my note for
some speed comparisons.

-- 
=Spencer
	({ihnp4,decvax}!utah-cs!thomas, thomas@utah-cs.ARPA)
		<<< Silly quote of the week >>>