Ulrich Drepper wrote:
Japheth J.C. Cleaver wrote:
> (Our mail server saw a
> performance boost of about 20% when we statically linked our process
I *very* much doubt those numbers. Using PIC and the runtime linker
does not add that much overhead. Never has, never will. If you compare
apples and oranges you can come up with such numbers, of course.
In the interests of correcting the record...
After researching this I've realized I was mistaken. That speed gain
involved not _just_ static linking, but the migration to dietlibc for
some of the most heavily used portions, as well as replacing bash with a
static ash for all our shell forking (lots). Those may have contributed
a significant portion of that speed bump.
I stand by my original point, however. Some run environments (like our
qmail/vpopmail clusters) benefit from changes that this thread (and the
ones regarding removing or bastardizing dietlibc on fedora-extras)
proposes making more difficult. Let's be perl-like: Make the easy things
easy (dynamic linking as normal) and the hard things possible (optional