Re: packaging static lib oriented software
On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, James A.Treacy wrote:
> 2. size
> Again, although shared libraries are only a little larger than
> static libs, that isn't the whole story. If you are sharing a
> library among many applications running simultaneously then
> shared libraries make sense. But with shared libraries, the
> entire library is loaded while with static libraries only
> those routines actually used are used. This means that for
> work which tends to have only one or a few copies running
> at a time, then static libraries end up using a LOT less
> RAM. When you are running large jobs, this can be quite
> important (with a package like lapack using a few hundred
> meg of RAM is quite common. You don't run more than one of
> those at a time).
You've missed the fact that Linux uses demand-paged code. If a specific
page of a library isn't used, it isn't loaded into memory (or is at least
easily discarded).
--
Scott K. Ellis <storm@gate.net> http://www.gate.net/~storm/
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: