Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 16:36:52 -0500 (EST) From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> To: dillon@earth.backplane.com (Matt Dillon) Cc: sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG (Maxim Sobolev), dima@unixfreak.org (Dima Dorfman), deischen@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mdconfig config file (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERI C) Message-ID: <200102042136.f14LaqU41149@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <200102022218.f12MIV700601@earth.backplane.com> from "Matt Dillon" at ÌÀÔ 02, 2001 02:18:31 ÐÐ
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Dillon once stated:
=:> <snip>
=:>
=:> if ((pid = fork()) == 0) {
=:
=:Probably vfork() is better here, no?
= My rule for using vfork() is: Does it improve performance in a
= noticeable way? The answer, at least for mount_*, is no. If the
= answer is no, you should simply use a normal fork().
=
= fork() under FreeBSD is not all that expensive. vfork() will be
= faster, but unless you are fork/exec'ing a few dozen commands a
= second you will never notice the difference.
I don't get this. Why would you deliberately use a slower method, even
if it is only a little bit slower? Also, someone _may_ be doing this a
few dozen times a second -- what do we know...
-mi
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102042136.f14LaqU41149>