Julian wrote: > Of course! Please find attached > I'm just not sure how to create the standard "patch" file, You just use the tortoise SVN function that does it. Never mind, I need to investigate why mkdir c:\ and mkdir x:\ behave differently. Is one a network drive, by any chance? > For windows, I am attaching the exe, but renaming to rsyncrypto.ex_ > since most mail filters will reject an exe attachment. No, please no large attachments to the mailing list. Your email was held because of size, and I'm not going to allow it through. > > Once I'm here, I just wanted to add an observation after running a > couple of tests with a mixture of large and small files: > With nullgzip, a significant decrease in CPU usage is observed, but > the duration of the whole operation is exactly the same. > Is this what is to be expected? Unfortunately, yes. Rsyncrypto was written when SMP machines were rather rare. It does have two processes, one encrypting and one compressing, so SOME parallelism is employed (and the reason there is no difference in time - the compression is not the longest operation, so it does not slow the program down).
One of the many things I would like to do for version 2 is to find a way to parallelize more, so that quad core and such can be used. I'm still not exactly sure how is the best way to do that. > > Thanks > Julian Shachar ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Rsyncrypto-devel mailing list Rsyncrypto-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rsyncrypto-devel
