Olivier, Because "-h is slow" hardly seems like a good justification for having static packages. Last I checked (which wasn't long ago..), BLAST is typically a long-running process (at least on the stuff we're doing..). Also, are subsequent calls (even '-h' ones) faster? I'd expect them to be, once everything is cache'd, which would reduce the justification that much further.. No, having the database stay in memory and being able to query against it rather than having to start up blast every time (ala FastCGI or something like you'd do for a webserver) might be a way to kill two birds w/ one stone, as it was, but that'd be a fair bit of work, I expect. Thanks, Stephen * olivier sallou (olivier.sallou@gmail.com) wrote: > Linking against "needed" lib is quite difficult (would need to be done on > upstream), package is rather complex regarding compilation. > And each solution has its pros and cons.... > > I think we will have to discuss on validity to provide static builds ( takes > a lot of space on package vs perf loss) > > Thanks anyway > > 2011/8/4 Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> > > > Julian Taylor, le Thu 04 Aug 2011 12:32:27 +0200, a écrit : > > > You might be able to reduce startup time by only linking against the > > > libraries you need or lazyly dynamically loading them. > > > > Or use prelink. > > > > Samuel > > > > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > > listmaster@lists.debian.org > > Archive: > > [🔎] 20110804112744.GF4985@type.bordeaux.inria.fr">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 20110804112744.GF4985@type.bordeaux.inria.fr > > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature