Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 12:00:05 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Alessandro de Manzano <adm@unixmania.net> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is a debug kernel slower than a non-debug one ? Message-ID: <20020405200005.GY93885@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <20020405215712.A14188@libero.sunshine.ale> References: <20020405215712.A14188@libero.sunshine.ale>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Alessandro de Manzano <adm@unixmania.net> [020405 11:57] wrote: > Hello! > > Well, the subj says more or less all.. ;-) > > On 4.x-STABLE systems, a kernel compiled with "options DDB" and > "makeoptions DEBUG=-g" is, at execution, slower than one compiled > without that two settings ? > Or is it "only" bigger on disk and, maybe, in memory ? > > I ask you this because I'm evaluating the possibility of enabling DDB > on my production servers' kernel so in the very rare case of crash I'll > got a crash dump ( I'ld use also options DDB_UNATTENDED) and could > immediately have a backtrace report. > > ..Am I crazy ? :-)) I don't think you'll notice a difference for most stuff, this is how I ran my production boxes for quite a while when I was doing admin work. It helped a _lot_ if a problem happened. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020405200005.GY93885>