On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 11:38:19 +0200, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:28:52 +0200, Gordan Bobic wrote: >> On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 18:09:34 +0200, Jan Kratochvil > >> <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > No. Please read /etc/sysconfig/prelink and >> > PRELINK_FULL_TIME_INTERVAL, only >> > once per two weeks. >> >> I meant every time prelink is run, not every time the binary is >> run. > > There is some misunderstanding here. prelink is run daily and it > only > prelinks newly installed/upgraded executables, it does not touch > already > prelinked executables. Once per two weeks it re-prelinks everything. > > So if your concerns are about changed executables content (for flash > wear > leveling?) that happens at most once per two weeks. I believe this > is > negligible change compared to other /var files changing all the time.
That argument is bogus since on a sanely configured flash system most of write-heavy /var things should be on tmpfs anyway. There is an (ignored) rhbz ticket filed for it. >> You are missing the main point - how much extra CPU and disk I/O is >> that going to take during the backup? > > Less than all the runtime relocations when executing the programs all > the > time. Bogus for servers where things tend to load once and stay running for months. > Please keep at the facts and not trying to find any possible reason > why to > avoid prelink. I could also invite you to stick to the facts and very realistic common use-cases without trying to justify using prelink at all costs. Gordan _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
