3 ms·
Can you please elaborate how using share libraries is "pretty much pointless and incurs a performance penalty"? That goes against my intuition of how they work.
by pradn 11y ago
Can you please elaborate how using share libraries is "pretty much pointless and incurs a performance penalty"? That goes against my intuition of how they work.
- bcg1 11y agoThink it means that most machines are not memory or disk constrained these days, but there is extra processing to perform the dynamic linking. Sort of a cost-benefit argument it seems. Doesn't address the issue of security etc and the benefit of just having 1 instance of a library to update when maintaining a complete system however.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jwr 11y ago[I should not have brought shared libs into this, I now regret it, because it sidetracked the entire discussion, but...] The extra processing is more significant than most people think. The library has to be compiled as relocatable code, which incurs a runtime performance penalty. You also lose a register, which especially on register-constrained architectures is really bad (it was a tragedy on iA32, it's less of an issue now).