Re:Nginx 1.9.11 with Dynamic Modules
by geocar on Tuesday February 09, 2016 @10:56AM
(#11066087)
> There's a (minuscule) performance advantage to static linking.
Is that actually true? I would have thought networking latency overshadows any memory latency introduced in a `call foo@PLT` v. `call *(foo@GOT)`.
Are you aware of anyone who has benchmarked this? i.e. not a microbenchmark e.g. inside something like nginx?
If so, it might be worth fixing the dynamic linker: the cost difference is absolutely fixable, as it's a tradeoff for sharing pages with other processes.
Is that actually true? I would have thought networking latency overshadows any memory latency introduced in a `call foo@PLT` v. `call *(foo@GOT)`.
Are you aware of anyone who has benchmarked this? i.e. not a microbenchmark e.g. inside something like nginx?
If so, it might be worth fixing the dynamic linker: the cost difference is absolutely fixable, as it's a tradeoff for sharing pages with other processes.