This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Large, modular C++ application performance ...
- From: michael meeks <michael dot meeks at novell dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Giovanni Bajo <rasky at develer dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 10:44:46 +0100
- Subject: Re: Large, modular C++ application performance ...
- References: <1122666555.19624.25.camel@linux.site> <019e01c5950b$a7ddff90$bf03030a@trilan> <17131.47092.25498.822504@zapata.pink>
- Reply-to: michael dot meeks at novell dot com
On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 18:25 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > > All input much appreciated; no doubt my terminology is irritatingly up
> > > the creek, hopefully the sentiment will win through.
> > >
> > > http://go-oo.org/~michael/OOoStartup.pdf
>
> One thing I don't understand is the formula where you write linking
> time is proprortional to the log of the total number of symbols. Does
> this come from drepper's paper, or somewhere else?
I defer to Ulrich's text:
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/dsohowto.pdf
Section 1.5 of:
"Deficiencies in the ELF hash table function and various ELF extensions
modifying the symbol lookup functionality may well increase the factor
to O(R + r.n.log(s)) where s is the number of symbols. This should make
clear that for improved performance it is significant to reduce the
number of relocations and symbols as much as possible".
However - the log(s) term is rather irrelevant to my argument :-)
HTH,
Michael.
--
michael.meeks@novell.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot