Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > Dolt illustrates that libtool performance should improve. However, the > performance numbers posted by Dolt's author are based on an outdated > version of libtool 1.5.X and libtool 2.2.X (containing four more years > of development) is considerably faster. > > I have already suggested on the libtool mailing list that DTrace can > be used to help evaluate where libtool is losing time. This is an > area where OpenSolaris developers can help the open source community > at large and illustrate that OpenSolaris is able to offer something > that Linux does not.
Per alanc's request I already did some investigation in this area since the FOX tree has some compile time trouble with libtool... ... part of the problem is that "libtool" acts like half a |fork()|-bomb and triggers many many child processes (as seen with the Dtrace fork-o-meter.d script). I did a small test and replaced #!/usr/bin/bash with #!/usr/bin/ksh93 and did some other changes - the resulting build time spend with libtool processes (e.g. "bash") droped to ~~46% of the original execution time (measured over five builds each (OkOk... that's not a perfect benchmark... ;-/ (nor do I claim to be an expert in benchmarking... ;-/))) ... and I'm confident that more performance can be pressed out of te script by using more of the ksh93 builtin commands (e.g. "basename" etc.) and replace some calls to "sed" by builtin string operators... and finally the ksh93-integration update1 will deliver "shcomp" (the ksh93 shell script compiler) which will help to squish even more performance out of such a script... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
