Re: Multia

Woodstock (woody@balintrc.gardens.udayton.edu)
Sun, 3 Nov 1996 15:38:34 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 3 Nov 1996, Eric Youngdale wrote:

> Technically speaking, the dynamic linking doesn't directly affect
> performance. What it will do is substantially reduce memory consumption, which
> can lead to less swapping, and this is what can result in the perception of
> improved performance.

You're right. But consider a kernel compile. gcc2.7.1 was statically
linked. gcc is called about 1,000 times during the compile. So, the
WHOLE gcc needs to be loaded in 1000 times. Dynamically linking, most of
the code stays in memory, and less load time. But I still agree.
Dynamic libs reduce memory consumption and disk access time.


> Nonetheless, a UDB with 24Mb is still a bit short on memory if you
> are running X with Emacs, Mosaic and trying to compile things, all at once.

True. 24 MB is fine on a pentuim... 32 bits. But for an Alpha at 64
bits....... =shiver= I need an upgrade!

balintrc@flyernet.udayton.edu -Woody!
balint@udayton.edu SysAdmin of WoodyNet!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Satanists For Life! Satanists For Life!

MORE abortions mean LESS souls for Satan!

Satanists For Life! Satanists For Life!

--
To unsubscribe: send e-mail to axp-list-request@redhat.com with
'unsubscribe' as the subject.  Do not send it to axp-list@redhat.com



Feedback | Store | News | Support | Product Errata | About Us | Linux Info | Search | JumpWords
No Frames | Show Frames

Copyright © 1995-1997 Red Hat Software. Legal notices