On Wednesday 11 May 2005 17:35, Humberto Massa wrote: > This is not an imaginary problem, after all, in principle. > > Let's see, as I wrote before, my installation has *thousands* of files > in /usr/lib and, in some filesystems, this can add up to a very large > time (and ab-use of dentry cache memory) to link, say, Konqueror (which > links to *hundreds* of shared objects). > > Imagine that, to load Konqui, you have to go 200 times to the disk (ok, > cache, but...), each of them reading the 10000 entries I have in > /usr/lib, some of them twice or three times, to follow the symlinks. > > This is a real inefficiency.
That is a possibility, it does sound sub-optimal. However, if you optimise before measuring there is no guarantee things will get any faster. Is reading the directory taking an appreciable amount of time compared to say, doing relocations? > So, if you ask me for MHO, ext3 should be used by default *with* > directory indexing. And maybe FHS should be pressed to provide something > like /usr/libexec. How much stuff would go in libexec? I suspect it would mostly be stuff in currently in subdirectories of /usr/lib, which is less than 7% of my /usr/lib. So 7% performance improvement on something that is yet to be proven to be a bottleneck. On some filesystems. Without benchmarks it's a pointless discussion anyway. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]