From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,718bd701b6b36346
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-08-13 14:11:38 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT/Ada95 Streams Performance Issue
Date: 13 Aug 2002 14:11:38 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0208131311.735b9993@posting.google.com>
References: <3D51ECC9.8020406@cogeco.ca> <aj8j3t$bmn$1@panorama.wcss.wroc.pl>
 <3D585F63.6010205@otelco.net>
 <5ee5b646.0208130025.41805ea8@posting.google.com> <3D590D80.201@otelco.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1029273098 11361 127.0.0.1 (13 Aug 2002 21:11:38
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Aug 2002 21:11:38 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27987
Date: 2002-08-13T21:11:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Larry Hazel <lhhazel@otelco.net> wrote in message news:<3D590D80.201@otelco.net>...
> Robert,
> After reading your reply and trying to remember what I did, I think the byte SIO 
>   program was the first attempt and not very fast.  I vaguely remember doing 
> something with direct io and large arrays of bytes for the program that was 
> faster than cp.
> Larry


That certainly makes more sense. The trouble is of course
that with Direct_IO you can't deal nicely with the last
partial block (you are also depending very much on impl
dependent choices in how Direct_IO works).

Stream_IO should have the speed advantage without these
disadvantages.