Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

footprint reduction: Investigate static link and binary compression #37

Closed
jhmarina opened this issue May 19, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed
Labels
kind/research Issues that need to be researched triage/next-candidate This could be moved to the next milestone

Comments

@jhmarina
Copy link
Contributor

jhmarina commented May 19, 2022

This issue comes from the discussion on the mailing list. We want to investigate if static linking & binary compression may help us in reducing the container footprint. Here's an excerpt of the conversation:

There are some more involved options that we could investigate:
Static linking and compressing the binary (e.g. with upx). This may impact some performance characteristics like startup time
Static linking might also allow us to eventually use options like
-fwhole-program at compile time, and -flto.

That might help us drop unused functions from the resulting binary without needing massive code/ifdef parties - at least if the compiler can truly determine the functions aren't called.

Depending on the outcome of the investigation, we'll work on the implementation.

@jhmarina jhmarina changed the title Static link and compress the binary Research: Static link and binary compression May 19, 2022
@jhmarina jhmarina added the kind/research Issues that need to be researched label May 19, 2022
@jhmarina jhmarina changed the title Research: Static link and binary compression Investigation: Static link and binary compression May 19, 2022
@jhmarina jhmarina changed the title Investigation: Static link and binary compression footprint reduction: Investigate static link and binary compression Jul 25, 2022
@jecluis jecluis transferred this issue from aquarist-labs/s3gw-tools Aug 3, 2022
m-ildefons pushed a commit to m-ildefons/s3gw that referenced this issue Feb 6, 2023
@jecluis
Copy link
Contributor

jecluis commented Jun 4, 2023

this is something we would still like to look into, at some point, time permitting. we should also follow up upstream and see where the rgw team is with carving out rgw from rados.

@jhmarina jhmarina added the triage/next-candidate This could be moved to the next milestone label Jun 6, 2023
@asettle
Copy link
Contributor

asettle commented Aug 1, 2023

Not going to happen

@asettle asettle closed this as completed Aug 1, 2023
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Backlog to Done in S3GW Aug 1, 2023
@asettle asettle closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Aug 1, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/research Issues that need to be researched triage/next-candidate This could be moved to the next milestone
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants