Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 16:27:01 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Gersh <gersh@sonn.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: crash dump speed up patch. Message-ID: <20010327162701.L9431@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103271415540.26315-100000@tabby.sonn.com>; from gersh@sonn.com on Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 02:20:02PM -0800 References: <20010327135341.I9431@fw.wintelcom.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103271415540.26315-100000@tabby.sonn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Gersh <gersh@sonn.com> [010327 14:14] wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> > it could be replaced with:
> >
> > if (count % 10)
> > printf("%d ", count);
> >
> that acutally gives alot more output, The basic idea was
> to only print out when it got to certian increments 10, 20
> Mainly becasue of the problem with serial connections :/
>
> It looks and feels a bit slower to the human eye but it does
> benchmark alot faster.
That was a typo, it should have been:
if (count % 10 == 0)
sorry. :)
--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010327162701.L9431>