Richard Elling wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 11:26:52PM +0100, Roland Mainz wrote: > >> ksh93-integration update1 landed a few days ago and added "shcomp" (the > >> shell script compiler) and a matching kernel module to recognize the > >> bytecode... > > > > Or perhaps merely "porting" (to make better use of built-ins) shell > > scripts to ksh93 will help the most. > > > >> ... does anyone have suggestions for which scripts a compilation would > >> be usefull ? > > > > You could analyze boot performance to find the SMF start method scripts > > that delay the most dependents by the most time. Those would be the > > scripts to target first. > > > > NB, a few years ago I made a lot of measurements in this area > using dtrace to figure out what was going on during boot. > Though more things are now becoming SMF'ed, the only > serialized area of concern for the boot scripts was the legacy > services. If someone wants to start this sort of analysis up > again, I'll be happy to share what data I have. > > BTW, the basic results showed that having more than one > CPU is the best thing you can do to improve boot performance. > This shouldn't be too surprising...
Right... but the idea of pre-compiling the shell scripts is to reduce the total CPU time consumed by the shell interpreter. Most scripting languages (like Python) already do this by default. ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;)
