Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 09:03:06 +0300 (EEST) From: Dmitry Pryanishnikov <dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: RELENG_4 -> 5 -> 6: significant performance regression Message-ID: <20060513085923.J74146@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> In-Reply-To: <20060513015809.GA18438@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060427160536.M96305@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <20060502181118.M92256@fledge.watson.org> <20060512232806.Q35558@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <20060513015809.GA18438@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello! On Fri, 12 May 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote: >> So maybe it's time to add, say, >> >> options INVARIANTS_EXTENDED >> >> for these new and expensive checks, and leave only basic and cheap (yet >> effective for bug hunting) asserts enabled when only >> >> options INVARIANTS >> >> is defined? > > No, they are all effective for bug hunting. You just need to be aware > that it is incompatible with performance. But, you know, many bugs can be hunted only under long-term production conditions, while incompatibility between INVARIANTS and performance effectively prevents successful bug hunting under these conditions, because performance is often critical in production. > Kris Sincerely, Dmitry -- Atlantis ISP, System Administrator e-mail: dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060513085923.J74146>