Actually, my first guess of TLS would not spell security (as in Transport Level Security), but would spell favoring-SMP (as in Thread-Level Storage). I suppose you /lib/tls is optimized for SMP and /lib/i686 for UP. Of course, I could be wrong, as this is written way too early in the morning.
Shachar Tal Verint Systems -----Original Message----- From: Oleg Kobets [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 12:56 AM To: Nadav Har'El Cc: My Own Private List Subject: Re: Redhat 9 slowness - continued Hmm, I always trust my inner instincts, and right now, they tell me that "tls" has something to do with encryption. Perhaps they made an encrypted version of C lib to prevent trojans and stuff and that added to the time programs run ? Makes sence to me. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2003 10:19 PM Subject: Redhat 9 slowness - continued > A few days ago, somebody complained about KDE being slower on Redhat 9 > than it was in earlier versions. I don't know if my experience is related, > but it confirms something bizarre is going on in Redhat 9. > > I just switched from a Pentium 500Mhz running Redhat 8, to a Pentium 1500 > running Redhat 9. > > Remember how Hspell 0.5 took ages to run, and Hspell 0.6 is much much faster > to start up? Well, being in love with that fact ( ;)) I wanted to see just > how quickly it runs on my new fast machine. On my old machine, it took it > 0.3 seconds to start up (hspell /dev/null). I expected it to take 0.1 seconds > (CPU time) to start on the new computer, but... It still took 0.3 seconds! > > I started cursing the fake CPU I probably have on the new machine, and > the bugs I probably have in Hspell, before I had an epiphany: what if > some dynamic-linking issues slowed hspell's running, and it wasn't hspell > itself which is slow? > > So I recomiled hspell staticly (-static, i.e., without shared libraries) > on both machines. Lo and behold, Hspell now takes just 0.23 seconds on > the old machine, and 0.095 seconds on the new machine. > > So, apparently, on Redhat 8 the dynamic linking added 21% to > "hspell /dev/null"'s static running time, while on Redhat 9, the > dynamic linking added 200% (!!!) to the running time of the static > program. In absolute terms, 0.2 extra CPU seconds were wasted on > Redhat 9, and this is on my new fast machine - on an old machine the > added time would have been enormous. > > But why is this happening? And why does it effect hspell, and not, say > "cat /dev/null"? > > One thing I noticed is that when I do "ldd" to hspell (or cat, or anything), > I don't get /lib/i686/... like I got in Redhat 8 - instead I get some > /lib/tls/.... What is that? setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH to /lib/i686 made > hspell very speedy again - 0.12 seconds - back to the acceptable 20% > overhead for dynamic linking. > > Does anybody know what these "tls" version of the C library are? Why > are they so much slower to load? Or is there another explanation to the > problems I'm seeing? > > Thanks for any insights, > Nadav. > > > -- > Nadav Har'El | Saturday, Nov 8 2003, 14 Heshvan 5764 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] |----------------------------------------- > Phone: +972-53-790466, ICQ 13349191 |Seen on the back of a dump truck: > http://nadav.harel.org.il |<---PASSING SIDE . . . . . SUICIDE---> > > ================================================================= > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] This electronic message contains information from Verint Systems, which may be privileged and confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us by replying to this email. ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
