On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 21:09:36 -0600, Xu, Dongxiao
wrote:
fp = fopen("/tmp/12321.txt", "w");
fakeroot doesn't intercept or alter fopen(). It'd be better to test
something
that is actually affected by fakeroot for a comparison. :)
fakeroot only traps things like stat and
On 12/9/10 9:09 PM, Xu, Dongxiao wrote:
> Test results are:
>
> Native: 2.729 secs
> Fakeroot: 2.752 secs
> Pseudo: 51.814 secs
>
> We saw pseudo cost about 20 times of seconds than native and fakeroot.
I believe that this is part of the fundamental differences between fakeroot and
pseudo.
Hi,
I did some simple tests for pseudo performance.
I wrote a simple program which is repeatedly calling fopen, fflush, and fclose,
which should be sensitive to pseudo/fakeroot since they trap the system calls.
I run the program on native, fakeroot, and pseudo.
int main()
{
FILE *fp;
