[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev z (was Re: Timeout parameter?)
From: |
Jason F. McBrayer |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev z (was Re: Timeout parameter?) |
Date: |
02 Sep 1998 15:04:35 -0500 |
>>>>> "BL" == Bela Lubkin <address@hidden> writes:
BL> Are there any readers who know about and deliberately do not turn
BL> on NSL_FORK?
I have it turned on on Linux but off on OS/2. Under OS/2, neither
fork() nor anything much like it is in the kernel; the fork() in EMX
(unix-like libraries for OS/2) is extremely inefficient. NSL_FORK
could be efficiently implemented on OS/2 using threads (I did
something similar in porting fetchmail), but I don't have time to
implement it right now.
BL> There *is* an overhead -- the process forks. Any "modern" Unix
BL> system (using virtual memory as good as 4.2BSD's or better, i.e.
BL> dating back at least 15 years) should take only a small memory
BL> hit...
Is there enough overhead to make NSL_FORK a concern on systems running
a lot of Lynxes at once? I'm thinking in particular of a Freenet that
uses Lynx as its main user interface.
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Jason F. McBrayer address@hidden |
| The scalloped tatters of the King in Yellow must hide Yhtill |
| forever. R.W. Chambers _The King in Yellow_ |