Subject: Re: RFC: migration to a fully dynamically linked system
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 12/20/2001 23:54:35
[ On , December 20, 2001 at 17:58:33 (-0800), firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: RFC: migration to a fully dynamically linked system
> > - dynamic linked applications apparently run slower
> > than statically linked applications.
> > Adding support for "prebinding" (in the newer
> > binutils toolchain for some platforms) alleviates
> > most (if not all) of this.
You can say that again! ;-)
> Does pre-binding do anything to touch the 'runs slower' problem? (I
> thought it just helped -- but did not completely address -- the
> 'starts slower' problem.)
From what I've read of experience with pre-binding in the NeXT/Darwin
circles it is a very significant help, but it can never eliminate the
all the overhead. Unless ld.so is a kernel service and all libraries
are first pre-loaded by the kernel there are always necessarily some
additional I/Os on every exec() of a dynamic linked program.
What can also win just as much is getting better locality of references
in all shared libraries and binaries.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>