On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 08:05:21PM +0200, Mark Liam Brown via Cygwin wrote: > Greetings! > > Are there tuning variables to improve ls, ls -l, find ., find . -ls > performance for very large dirs? > > If we have a SMB dir with 60000+ entries a simple ls -l can take MANY > minutes (22+mins), while cmd.exe dir just floods the terminal with > results immediately.
`man ls` This might help a little bit: `ls -1f` # one (-1) for single line output, and -f to disable sorting Of course, please also ask why there are 60000 files in one directory rather than sharded or stored some other way. e.g. for log files, create an archive/ subfolder and rotate all non-recently, less-frequently accessed files to that subfolder so that the main folder has (many) fewer entries. For a folder that size, `ls` and `ls -l` are less appropriate tools. A web server could serve a single index.html with the directory listing, and the directory listing could be updated when the folder changes, or on a periodic basis. Various solutions depend on context and usage of the folder and its contents. Whether or not cmd.exe handles such a large directory better is immaterial to the assessment that 60000+ entries in a single folder is lacking better folder organization/file management and access methods Cheers, Glenn -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
