On Sat, 2023-01-07 at 23:09 +, Colin Watson wrote:
> A shame!
Sorry for the noise, seems like this request was a bit half-baked.
Thanks for looking into the proposals, it is unfortunate that they
aren't viable (yet). I'll leave it to you to close or wontfix the bug
or keep it open until
On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 at 12:12:32AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 11:55:16AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > * posix_spawn: this uses the appropriate mechanisms on each platform,
> > glibc might be changing this to use io_uring_spawn where possible.
>
> I can see a few
On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 11:55:16AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> The new io_uring_spawn mechanism for spawning processes without forking
> should be more efficient than fork+exec, especially when starting small
> processes from large processes. Also posix_spawn and vfork+exec exist.
>
>
Package: libpipeline1
Version: 1.5.7-1
Severity: wishlist
The new io_uring_spawn mechanism for spawning processes without forking
should be more efficient than fork+exec, especially when starting small
processes from large processes. Also posix_spawn and vfork+exec exist.
4 matches
Mail list logo
