Making a dynamically-linked root

[Andrew Gallatin]

Kenneth Culver writes:
 > > I don't want to sound harsh, and I do appreciate your work.  However,
 > > I think the last thing FreeBSD needs now is to get slower.  We're
 > > already far slower than that other free OS.  Shouldn't we consider
 > > making the dynamic root optional and leaving a static root as
 > > standard?
 > 
 > Since when are we "far slower" than the other free operating system?
 > According to all my benchmarks and personal use, the two are about the
 > same, with FreeBSD "feeling" slightly faster. That said, I think making
 > the / binaries dynamically linked optional is a good idea.


Since SMPng.  Try running webstone (available in ports) on a server
with multiple 10/100 links, or a gig link.  By any metric you choose,
5.x is slower than 4.x, and much slower than linux.  

Note this is not intended to be a criticism of SMPng.  Once the
locking in 5.x is completed, I think things will look a _LOT_ better.
But as it is now, we're paying most of the price and not reaping many
benefits because too much of the system is still under Giant.

Drew