LFS-BOOK-3.2-RC1 - minor correction and suggestions
marc at koelkast.net
Wed Feb 13 10:09:26 PST 2002
Op wo 13-02-2002, om 17:08 schreef Gerard Beekmans:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 02:10:04AM +0100, Matthias Benkmann wrote:
> > This means that for 140ms more time you gain 830K more memory. So every
> > time you say one-one-hundred you earn 8MB of RAM. That sounds like a good
> > deal to me :-) A little bit more scientifically:
> > A 3.4% increase in running time buys you a reduction of RSS by 29%.
> So --without-gnu-malloc is better for the system resources wise if you do
> extreme things. I thing the average user wouldn't have a need for such
> long loops so I'm wondering how this differs for average day-to-day use,
> say running all the bootscripts.
The 1nf1n173 100P writers among us will surely profit from this (because
their loops take longer) but to me, speed is more important than memory
usage. I doubt that the bootscripts would run any faster or slower or
take up more or less space without the GNU malloc (which malloc is used
then, since Bash is also GNU?) because the bottleneck is the programs
- A Cow.
Marc Heerdink <marc at koelkast.net>
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev