Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site gsg.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!gsg!kathy
From: kathy@gsg.UUCP (Kathryn Smith)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.lang.c
Subject: Re: I HATE DBX! I HATE DBX!
Message-ID: <169@gsg.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Mar-86 10:26:24 EST
Article-I.D.: gsg.169
Posted: Thu Mar  6 10:26:24 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Mar-86 02:58:00 EST
References: <4473@think.ARPA>, <5895@allegra.UUCP>
Organization: General Systems Group, Salem, NH
Lines: 19
Xref: watmath net.unix-wizards:17098 net.lang.c:8087


	We started using DBX here when we got it on our Pyramid, but flushed
it fairly quickly after discovering some of its properties.  We wanted to 
use it on some large executables, and started running into problems almost
immediately.  The error messages varied somewhat, but it boiled down to the
simple fact that we couldn't have more than one person running DBX on this
project at once.  This struck as as sort of unreasonable, since we were running
on a reasonably large system (a Pyramid 90x), so we started looking at how 
much memory the thing was using.  After running some tests then recomiling the
application to use SDB instead, it turned out that DBX requires somewhere
between 10 and 15 times the memory resources that the same program compiled with
SDB requires.  This makes DBX practically useles for anything but trivial 
development.  Is this a problem peculiar to Pyramid's release of it, or is it
universal?

						Kathryn Smith
						(...decvax!gsg!kathy)
						General Systems Group
						Salem, NH