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
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to