cgi-bin

[Bryce McKinlay]

On Monday, Sep 15, 2003, at 09:13 Pacific/Auckland, Jeff Sturm wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Sep 2003, Erik Poupaert wrote:
>> -rwxr-xr-x    1 erik     users     2221532 Sep 14 18:33 test.cgi
>> -rwxr-xr-x    1 erik     users       84064 Sep 14 17:01 webmail.cgi
>>
>> Frustrating, isn't it?
>
> Indeed.  Shared libraries are the way to go, but libgcj.so needs to be
> more efficient.
>
> The three important considerations in my mind are (in no particular
> order):
>
> 1) startup time
> 2) memory footprint
> 3) runtime overhead
>
> At the moment, libgcj.so loses on all three :-(

Its worth pointing out that the bc-abi ought to fix much of the startup 
time and resident-memory-footprint issues. By eliminating public 
symbols for classes/methods/fields the runtime relocation overhead 
should be dramatically reduced - hopefully the linker won't even have 
to touch most of libgcj.so. Of course, there will be some additional 
overhead in libgcj's class linker, but since this work will be done 
lazily as classes are actually used, i'd expect the results to be 
comparable with static linking and prelinking. Also, if we make the 
previously-discussed changes to CNI requiring explicit GC registration 
of static roots, the collector will no longer have to scan for roots 
outside of the stack.

Regards

Bryce.