Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 20 Sep 1998 15:32:15 +1200 | From | Chris Wedgwood <> | Subject | Re: AVL and hash in memory management |
| |
On Sat, Sep 19, 1998 at 11:14:21PM -0400, sfrost@ns.snowman.net wrote:
> It's not, and I wasn't saying it was, I suppose I should have made > that point more obvious, starting sub-shells under any OS I've come > accross so far is slow, would love to see Linux's run alot faster > than Solaris's though, would give me another thing to tell > management about how Linux is better... :)
Starting bash under SunOS 4.1.3 vs Linux on the same box (hypersparc 90, UP) - linux is much faster. I've not looked at why.
> That is defintely something else to look at, also I've seen alot of > shell scripts that uses '#!/bin/sh', but are really for bash and > won't run under the 'sh' found on other systems, would be better if > they did '#!/bin/bash', or that 'sh' not just be 'bash', but that's > all something for the distributors really...
`ash' is available is much faster in many cases.
> Hmmm, configure scripts are just about an everyday thing to me, as > the admin I get to run around upgrading all the software, after > testing it and making sure it doesn't break anything else and other > things.
Oh - they are for me to, but in total, I doubt I would spend more that 0.5% of my CPU time running them compared to a squid or somesuch.
For me, a 10% speed increase in network IO or disk IO compared to a 300% increase in running ./configure is more worth while.
-cw
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |