Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:43:27 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh Message-ID: <p06002008bbe852e1c695@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <16322.26365.159173.946033@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> References: <16322.26365.159173.946033@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 3:15 PM -0500 11/24/03, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>Here is a simple test which times the execution of a null
>shell script. It basically times fork/exec of the chosen
>shell.
>So.. forking a dynamic sh is roughly 40% more expensive
>than forking a static copy of sh. This is embarrassing.
To be more precise: shell scripts which do-nothing will
be 40% more expensive than they used to be. It is not
like the entire operating system will get 40% slower.
>I propose that we at least make /bin/sh static.
I suggest that we leave all of /bin and /sbin as it is for
5.2-release. We are still telling users that 5.2 is a
snapshot of "-current", and it is more valuable to have a
wider range of experience with this worst-case scenario.
("worst-case" == all files dynamically linked).
We certainly may want to make changes to address the
performance issues that you note, but there is no reason
we must decide *which* change should be made right now.
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06002008bbe852e1c695>