On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Lord Isildur wrote:

> one note about the libc growth- some of it has gotten a LOT slower. 
> for example, on bob's machien he put up for testing yesterday, i ran some 
> test program that among other things calledprintf a little under 300 
> thousand time. compiled with dynamic linking, with -O2, it took the 
> printfs about 980 seconds to run. Compiled statically, about 910 seconds. 
> On the ka650 at home, with a much older libc, the same thing took about 
> 85 seconds. (the program did about 90 seconds of other work).. 

That's an impressive performace hit!

I assume that you directed the output to a file. Both machines ka650?

This is a serious performance degradation, and it _should_ be fairly easy
to figure out where the hit took place.

	Johnny

Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt@update.uu.se           ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol