3 ms·
This has NOTHING to do with shared libraries vs. statically-linked code. The size of the binary is completely irrelevant when considering if the code fits in t
by 4ad 11y ago
This has NOTHING to do with shared libraries vs. statically-linked code.
The size of the binary is completely irrelevant when considering if the code fits in the CPU cache. What's important is the size of code that actually executes. Dynamic linking changes nothing.
- twoodfin 11y agoI'm not sure what you mean. Absent some deduplication wizardry by the OS, if I have 60 processes using the "same" statically linked copy of libfoo, that's 60 copies of libfoo's instructions and static data fighting for cache and real memory. Dynamic linking & decades-old virtual memory technology cull that to a single copy.