site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com On 28 Jan 2008, at 02:15, Peter Seebach wrote: That's more or less true for Linux, but not for Mac OS X at least up till 10.4.x (I haven't benchmarked on 10.5 yet). Compiling our compiler with itself, which involves about 173 (v)fork+execs from a single compiler run to assemble&link all the files, is 20% to 25% slower with fork instead of vfork on a G4, and 35% to 40% on a G5 (32 bit processes in both cases) on 10.4.x. And for clarity: this is relative to the entire time needed for compiling+assembling+linking everything (on the G5: 24 vs 15 seconds), not some academic mbench- like speed difference between the fork and vforks. Yes. It does make a difference, but even so, the API is deprecated, so even if this hurts performance a bit, it's still probably best to avoid it whenever possible. Jonas _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... In message <9F31611D-701E-4351-B63D-916E520C584A@elis.ugent.be>, Jonas Maebe wr ites: If it only hurt performance a bit I would never have changed the code from using fork (which is what we used on all other *nix ports) into using vfork in the first place. But a 25% to 40% slowdown caused by 173 system calls in the process of compiling about 180 kloc is astronomical in my view. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com