Re: VAX static vs dynamic performance

[Johnny Billquist <bqt%update.uu.se@localhost>]

On 2014-04-24 07:58, Anders Magnusson wrote:
> David Brownlee skrev 2014-04-24 00:47:
> > I thought I'd test the static vs dynamic netbsd-6 install on simh (on
> > my T420s thinkpad). Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your
> > view) the numbers do not seem to be significant.
> >
> > Timed by hand, repeated a couple of times:
> >
> >  From completion of kernel load sizes line until login prompt
> > - dynamic: ~58 sec
> > - static: ~56 sec
> >
> > Login as root with empty password, from RETURN to # prompt
> > - dynamic: ~19 sec
> > - static: ~18 sec
> Thanks for testing this.  Only a few % slower would be expected, since
> there is not much difference between PIC and non-PIC code on vax.

Well, there is more than just PIC as a difference. With dynamic 
executables, you have to open dynamic libraries, load them into memory 
at runtime, resolve symbols, and so on, which have been suggested in the 
past to be a big source of the slowdown. It would now seem that is not 
the case, so it really is something done in the kernel that have gotten 
way slower.

        Johnny