Here is another stackoverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2032779/will-multiple-instances-of-an-executable-built-with-static-libraries-share-any
mapserv can only share with itself. Think of it as one file on disk equals one copy in ram.
-Andy On 5/15/2015 4:34 PM, Richard Greenwood wrote:
Thanks for the reply Andy. I had Googled a bit and found this stackoverflow <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2649334/difference-between-static-and-shared-libraries> discussion in which the answer at the bottom said: "The most significant advantage of shared libraries is that there is only one copy of code loaded in memory, no matter how many processes are using the library. For static libraries each process gets its own copy of the code. This can lead to significant memory wastage." But I'm not sure if that's applicable with a web/fcgi application. rich On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Andy Colson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 5/15/2015 3:59 PM, Richard Greenwood wrote: I'm working on Linux and have statically linked mapserv for convenience but now I'm wondering if it is adversely affecting memory use. For example, if I have five fcgi mapserv instance like: mapserv.fcgi?map=mapfile1.map mapserv.fcgi?map=mapfile2.map mapserv.fcgi?map=mapfile3.map mapserv.fcgi?map=mapfile4.map mapserv.fcgi?map=mapfile5.map Am I using more memory with my static build than if they all referencing the shared libmapserver.so? Thanks, rich I believe you will pay for the cost of one executable, the others will share the code pages, but get their own data pages. So no, you probably are not using more memory using static build. -Andy -- Richard W. Greenwood, PLS www.greenwoodmap.com <http://www.greenwoodmap.com>
_______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
