David Masover wrote:
Hans Reiser wrote:
| David Masover wrote:
|
|>
|>
|> Speaking of which, how much speed is lost by starting up a process?
|>
|> The idea of caching is that running
|>
|> cat *; cat *; cat *; cat *; cat *
|>
|> is probably slower than
|>
|> cat * > baz; cat baz; cat baz; cat baz; cat baz; cat baz
|
|
| Only for small files where the per file overhead of a read is significant.
That's potentially a common problem, and "cat *" is an overly-simplified example. Either you force the "plugin" to say whether it wants to be cached or not, or you cache everything, because there are going to be plugins like "tar -xjp" for which caching is a HUGE increase.
Ok, I accept the argument.
