On Tuesday 25 November 2003 06:45, Andrew Gallatin wrote: > So.. forking a dynamic sh is roughly 40% more expensive than > forking a static copy of sh. This is embarrassing. > > I propose that we at least make /bin/sh static. (and not add a > /sbin/sh; if we must have a dynamic sh, import pdksh, or put a > dynamically linked sh in /usr/bin/sh). > > I'd greatly prefer that the the dynamic root default be backed out > until a substantial amount of this performance can be recovered.
What _REAL WORLD_ task does this slow down? My production systems don't spin in infinite loops spawning shell processes which die straight away. If yours do, well.. curious, but I hardly think it is of relevance to most users of FreeBSD. If it is for you then just build your world with static root. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 9A8C 569F 685A D928 5140 AE4B 319B 41F4 5D17 FDD5 _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"