Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:20:24 +0300 From: Diomidis Spinellis <dds@aueb.gr> To: infofarmer@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Idea: static builds Message-ID: <4707D1E8.5000103@aueb.gr> In-Reply-To: <20071006150207.GA19775@amilo.cenkes.org> References: <20071004190304.GA9491@hades.panopticon> <20071006150207.GA19775@amilo.cenkes.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 11:03:04PM +0400, Dmitry Marakasov wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I just have an idea that may be useful: static port builds. This can >> help produce packages without any depends, which may be useful >> sometimes. > > What I'd like to see first is some quantitative research on the > benefits of it. Static builds are a lot more headache than one > could imagine from a number points of view. I can give you quantitative data on the benefits of shared objects. On a web server running FreeBSD 6.2 I found 98 shared objects sharing 16,790,901 bytes of memory through 1,002 mappings. Without shared libraries the corresponding binaries would require 198,815,270 bytes - an order of magnitude more. On freefall I found 58 shared objects sharing 11,285,262 bytes of memory through 2,127 mappings. Without shared libraries the corresponding binaries would require 515,107,268 bytes - 50 times more. These are not just memory savings, but, more importantly on a modern system, they contribute to improved locality in the code cache. I've put the Perl script I used for obtaining these figures at http://www.spinellis.gr/blog/20071006/ Diomidis Spinellis - dds@
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4707D1E8.5000103>