Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxn!mhuxm!mhuxj!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Speed of read vs. fread
Message-ID: <2715@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 26-Jan-85 22:54:02 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.2715
Posted: Sat Jan 26 22:54:02 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Feb-85 11:43:51 EST
References: <626@ihlts.UUCP> <1350@hao.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 18

The latest Berkeley C library (which as far as I know is not on any
distribution tapes---in other words, don't bother asking for a new
tape) has optimized fread/fwrite, using bcopy() if necessary, which
runs MUCH faster.  (Put new life into those old programs....)

The big advantage fread/fwrite have is that you don't have to do any
kind of buffering, so that when/if 4.nBSD acquires copy-on-write, true
virtual reads, invisible memory sharing, and all those kind of
performance goodies that make page-aligned exact-size buffers do
wonders for performance, why, all you need to do is recompile....

(But I wouldn't recommend holding your breath. :-) )
-- 
(This line accidently left nonblank.)

In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7690)
UUCP:	{seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@maryland