| 1 |
On 10 Jun 2008, at 16:14, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:38:52 +0530 |
| 4 |
> "Arun Raghavan" <arunisgod@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Ciaran McCreesh |
| 6 |
>> <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> [...] |
| 8 |
>>> - it doubles the number of file reads necessary during resolution. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> The first read will cause the file to be cached for subsequent reads |
| 11 |
>> anyway, so the performance hit boils down to an additional read() |
| 12 |
>> call |
| 13 |
>> (which will probably be buffered by your file I/O library anyway, so |
| 14 |
>> it's unlikely to even result in a context switch). And even without, |
| 15 |
>> it is well worth the lack of fugliness in the ebuild name. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> No, it results in a new open() on a file that's elsewhere on disk, |
| 18 |
> which |
| 19 |
> results in two new seeks. You get about fifty seeks per second. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Plus path resolution, which isn't exactly free |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
- ferdy |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives