Performance difference native/linux OOo1.1

[Harald Schmalzbauer]

On Monday 01 December 2003 01:47, Martin Blapp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I am wondering why there is such a big performance difference between the
> > linux and the native OpenOffice version on FreeBSD 5.2-beta (i386).
> > For example starting the native OO takes about 30 seconds, where the
> > Linux version takes about 5 seconds.
>
> I suspect that our loader/shared library support is more expensive than the
> linux one. I'll try to debug the speed problems this week.

For the records:
Martin answered to my mail (Harald Schmalzbauer):
> > For example starting the native OO takes about 30 seconds, where the
> > Linux version takes about 5 seconds.
>
> Hmm, could be a rtld issue. Can you trace the binary calls and see
> where it spends so much time ?
>
> > If some of you speak german please also have a look at:
> > http://www.bsdforen.de/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2177
>
> Just did that. I'm swiss :)

Grüezi Martin Blapp,

I answered:

Regrettably I'm not familar with any debuging tools nor do I have any 
programmer skills.
But if there's anybody who guides me through "Can you trace the binary calls 
and see where it spends so much time" I'd love to do that.
But I think explanation was much more expensive than spending your own's time.

But please let me know If I can do any testing!
Seti's getting too much cycles these days;-)

Thanks a lot,

-Harry
>
> Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-openoffice/attachments/20031201/b8838315/attachment.bin