Shared libraries (was Re: Window system bashing (was Re: X11 bashing))

[Sean Eric Fagan]

In article <73761 at brunix.UUCP> cgy at cs.brown.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
>In article <BZS.91Apr28000804 at world.std.com> bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
>>Try running some job using shared and statically linked libraries on
>>various systems. I've seen from 5-10% to 75% performance degradations
>>(granted the last was odd enough to look into, but it was there.)
>Statically linked shared libraries should incur little or no performance hit.

On a '386 running SCO UNIX (or xenix, for that matter), a call to a shared
library function one jump in addition to the normal call.  Thus, there is a
*very* slight performance hit.

I don't necessarily agree that most of libc should be shared.  libX, on the
other hand, as well as the toolkit libraries, would be a *very* good thing
to share, for many reasons; the increase in execution time is offset far
more than enough by the savings in paging, physical memory, and disk space
used.

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it;
sef at kithrup.COM  |  I had a bellyache at the time."
-----------------+           -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_)
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.