3.0.25 svn rev. 21532

[Jelmer Vernooij]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 09:50:14PM +0100, Thomas Bork wrote: 
>> How can I get rid of librpc (if librpc is really the thing which is 
>> blowing up smbd so much)?
> You can get rid of librpc by sticking with 3.0.24. It is
> very likely that with the move to PIDL we will gain smbd
> binary footprint in the future, but we have to weigh this
> against code maintainability.
> 
> Yes, this does cost half a meg of disk space, but it
> definitely does not cost this 500k per smbd.
> 
> Much more important than static text size is the heap usage,
> and by a change I committed to tdb we now save about 250k
> heap memory per smbd compared to 3.0.24. This is *MUCH* more
> important than saving 500k disk space, at least from our
> point of view.
If disk usage is really a problem, there are several things that could
help save on disk usage. Some that come to mind are:

 * allow building without the print functions. That should save about a
third on the new code. I agree though that disk space shouldn't be too
much of a problem.
 * Using shared libs internally (since the RPC parsing code is in both
rpcclient and smbd at the moment)

I haven't done any measurements on the amount of RAM used by librpc, but
I can't think of any reason why it would be significantly more than
currently.

Cheers,

Jelmer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBReSmkgy0JeEGD2blAQLWjAP+OKOUuWKcIVoKMFZ9WZDcxWD0ShRdwUbZ
agJDKCohalJx3sJUOWvNkr6/b8rs/tT2EL0O6bYTy16lDD9CSDf6oUtMofAS/hwY
Og3Q+MWBMUvJ9gRmKwVjLqdaSsrYFVsUsR9B3ZL9jF6Z5ytoOfrhne5xiwjMYNzL
0PJjh75fXzA=
=1wAz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----