On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 09:20:24PM +0300, Diomidis Spinellis wrote: > Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 11:03:04PM +0400, Dmitry Marakasov wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> I just have an idea that may be useful: static port builds. This can >>> help produce packages without any depends, which may be useful >>> sometimes. >> What I'd like to see first is some quantitative research on the >> benefits of it. Static builds are a lot more headache than one >> could imagine from a number points of view. > > I can give you quantitative data on the benefits of shared objects. On a > web server running FreeBSD 6.2 I found 98 shared objects sharing 16,790,901 > bytes of memory through 1,002 mappings. > Without shared libraries the corresponding binaries would require > 198,815,270 bytes - an order of magnitude more. > > On freefall I found 58 shared objects sharing 11,285,262 bytes of memory > through 2,127 mappings. Without shared libraries the corresponding binaries > would require 515,107,268 bytes - 50 times more. > > These are not just memory savings, but, more importantly on a modern > system, they contribute to improved locality in the code cache. > > I've put the Perl script I used for obtaining these figures at > http://www.spinellis.gr/blog/20071006/
Cool :) Here's what I get on our hosting server (lots of PHP FastCGI processes): 115 shared objects sharing 23242679 of memory with 11800 mappings. Without shared libraries 4806500943 bytes would be needed. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"