> I wrote a really simple program, forktest.c. Chris beat me to the punch, but I'm posting anyway because I went a different direction. I wrote some rc scripts that make static and dynamic libraries of various sizes and programs that use those libraries (trivially). For each number of functions 1, 10, 100, 1000, 10000, 100000 I timed static and dynamic execution of a program that conditionally calls that many functions in 1 or 10 libraries. The scripts are attached, run mklibs, then mkprogs, then runtests. Below are the results of a single run on my laptop (fixed with font looks better). I can't spend any more time on this, but it was a fun morning goof-off.
Static (functions libraries binary-size user system elapsed)
1 1 556898 0.24 0.50 0.78
10 1 557324 0.28 0.44 0.82
10 10 557913 0.32 0.42 0.81
100 1 561737 0.24 0.50 0.84
100 10 562196 0.28 0.46 0.79
1000 1 609496 0.29 0.47 0.83
1000 10 606381 0.26 0.48 0.84
10000 1 1105475 0.30 0.44 0.87
10000 10 1083834 0.28 0.47 0.82
100000 1 6245494 0.27 0.48 0.88
100000 10 6043871 0.28 0.48 0.81
Dynamic (functions libraries binary-size user system elapsed)
1 1 6489 0.49 0.86 1.39
10 1 7322 0.52 0.86 1.45
10 10 7464 0.83 1.14 2.03
100 1 16366 0.59 0.78 1.42
100 10 16177 1.14 1.11 2.35
1000 1 108268 0.55 0.87 1.47
1000 10 104496 0.88 1.12 2.07
10000 1 1077758 0.81 0.98 1.89
10000 10 1037387 1.12 1.36 2.63
100000 1 10915272 2.79 2.50 6.31
100000 10 10517862 3.13 3.68 7.13
I think dynamic 100-10 is a fluke, I also think it's interesting that
the dynamic binaries are bigger above 10000 function calls. Don't
know why, don't have time to figure it out.
Micah
mklibs
Description: Binary data
mkprog
Description: Binary data
mkprogs
Description: Binary data
runtests
Description: Binary data
