Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uwmcsd1!marque!gryphon!sarima
From: sarima@gryphon.CTS.COM (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Sticky bit -- To set or not to set.
Message-ID: <3571@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Date: 24 Apr 88 23:10:22 GMT
References: <13085@brl-adm.ARPA>
Reply-To: sarima@gryphon.CTS.COM (Stan Friesen)
Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 22

In article <13085@brl-adm.ARPA> "oread::barbanis"@coins.cs.umass.edu writes:
>
>Is there any reason at all to have the sticky bit on in an executable?
>Or, to put it differently, under what circumstances should it be set?
>(circumstances such as program size, hardware/OS, program usage
>pattern, etc.)
>Unless I've missed something, only the ex/vi family editors have
>the sticky bit on, on both our Suns and Vaxen.  Why is this A Good Thing
>(or is it A Good Thing at all?)
>
	The sticky bit should be set *only* for very heavily used programs
that are not in continuous use. It is intended to help reduce the startup
overhead of major system utilities, like vi, especially moderately large ones.
WARNING: setting the sticky bit uses up swap space and RAM, so make sure you
have enough of both to handle ALL sticky programs plus any normal user program
mix that you can foresee. Thus on most systems only vi/ex and perhaps the
shells need or should have the sticky bit set. On some turnkey systems it
might be useful to make the main user application sticky as well.
-- 
Sarima Carandolandion			sarima@gryphon.CTS.COM
aka Stanley Friesen			rutgers!marque!gryphon!sarima
					Sherman Oaks, CA