On Oct 4, 2011, at 12:27 AM, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > > On 2 Oct 2011, at 11:58 , Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 01, 2011 at 11:22:28PM +0200, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: >>> Doing fork/exec sounds expensive, but on a posix box there is not much >>> difference between that and spawning a thread: >>> http://bulk.fefe.de/scalable-networking.pdf >> >> Please don't base decisions on questionable micro-benchmarks. fork+exec >> is significantly more expensive than thread creation in a >> multi-processor environment. > > [...] > In any case, the cost of fork/exec would be less than 0.1 ms. As most Fossil > commands take much longer than that, I think the proposal is a practical > design for wrapping Fossil.
Anyhow Fossil is doing only fork, which is pretty cheap. And, unless some crazy security folk take over, there is no reason to change this :) Kind regards, Remigiusz Modrzejewski _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
