Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:22:08 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> Cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> Subject: Re: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh Message-ID: <20031125012208.GD46761@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <200311251049.18227.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> References: <16322.26365.159173.946033@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <200311251049.18227.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Nov 25), Daniel O'Connor said: > On Tuesday 25 November 2003 06:45, Andrew Gallatin wrote: > > So.. forking a dynamic sh is roughly 40% more expensive than > > forking a static copy of sh. This is embarrassing. > > > > I propose that we at least make /bin/sh static. (and not add a > > /sbin/sh; if we must have a dynamic sh, import pdksh, or put a > > dynamically linked sh in /usr/bin/sh). > > > > I'd greatly prefer that the the dynamic root default be backed out > > until a substantial amount of this performance can be recovered. > > What _REAL WORLD_ task does this slow down? Try timing "cd /usr/ports/www/mozilla-devel ; make clean" with static and dynamic /bin. bsd.port.mk spawns many many many /bin/sh processes. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031125012208.GD46761>