From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jun 20 13:33:06 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id NAA14637 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 20 Jun 1995 13:33:06 -0700 Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.1]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA14626 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 1995 13:33:04 -0700 Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin [198.145.90.18]) by Root.COM (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA07830; Tue, 20 Jun 1995 13:32:54 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.11/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA02393; Tue, 20 Jun 1995 13:33:16 -0700 Message-Id: <199506202033.NAA02393@corbin.Root.COM> To: Thomas Graichen cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: freebsd and memory In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 19 Jun 95 20:16:09 +0200." <9506191816.AA04427@sirius.physik.fu-berlin.de> From: David Greenman Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM Date: Tue, 20 Jun 1995 13:33:14 -0700 Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >* is FreeBSD using demand paging for it's shared libs - i don't think (i can Yes, FreeBSD uses demand paging for all mapped file operations. This includes shared libraries as well as regular binaries. The main reason that Linux uses less memory is that they go to great lengths to order the routines in the shared libraries to reduce the sparseness of accesses for typical programs. This results in fewer page faults and less memory consumption when a small set of of programs are involved. Another difference is the Linux filesystem. It plays much more "fast and loose" with the updates of metadata which makes it much faster at file creations and deletions, but also makes it more suseptable to severe filesystem corruption if the system should crash. -DG