Thread: Looking for C developpers

Originally Posted by SurferIX

Let's talk about the speed : everything that was of no use has been removed. For example there is no X Display. Only SSH and command line mode. Mutt, vim and screen should be enough for every Apache C module developper !

I suppose that if you're not running anything on the system, that will make it faster. But is it really worth not being able to run any X applications?

Maybe I didn't express myself properly : the OS is a Debian, and is 50 % faster than a classical distro, which means if it takes 3 minutes to do one thing on a classical distro, it will take 2 minutes on my PC.

For anything?

Moreover, I've got 2 x 250 Gb hard drives that are replicated by the OS itself (one of the hot new stuff in the latest kernel), and when it comes to read, the kernel reads from both disks, resulting in a 25-30 % speed up (sorry for my English it's so poor). Same from writing, which makes small copies of files instantaneous.

Admittedly I know very little about this, but I suppose reading duplicate disks could increase the speed. But I can't imagine writing the same data to two disks would be faster than writing the same data to one disk.

Unless you mean, for example, every even byte is stored on this disk, and every odd byte on the other . . . .

Compiling the latest Apache took less than 20 seconds.
Compiling the latest Php took less than 12 seconds !!

This is just incredible how fast is it.

I find that hard to believe, especially since Apache is several hundred thousand lines long.

Code:

  '''It takes time!!!''' Do NOT interrupt the process with a '''ctrl-c''', it does not work.
Either wait or kill the process. If you kill it, you will be better cleaning up the directory
before retrying the command, there are a lot of meta-files created.
+ So have a coffee. Forget about your micro-wave oven, don't use instant coffee. You have
plenty of time (10 minutes at least) !
  
...
+ Total: 357319

That means your system is, what, 30 times faster than that, assuming you were compiling approximately the same amount of source code? . . . .

What does "time <command>" tell you? If it only takes 20 seconds, you won't mind redoing it, will you?

Originally Posted by abachler

Fast, cheap, works, pick two. If he is tryig to get it cheap then that is a defacto choice. Either he must take the time to find cheap labor that can make it work or he must not take the time, he cannot do both.

Off topic, but the current SQLite homepage slogan is: Small. Fast. Reliable. Choose any three.

Considering that SQLite is in the public domain, one could say that it is cheap. Reliable means it works, so effectively the slogan can be expanded to: small, fast, cheap, works, pick four

Originally Posted by SurferIX

The bottleneck is... MySQL actually.

But no, do not go around thinking that SQLite can always serve as a drop in replacement for MySQL, even though for many applications that is the case.