Comment

Debian is superior for server tasks. musl is designed to optimize for smaller binaries on disk. Memory is a secondary goal, and cpu time is a non-goal. musl isn't meant to be fast, it's meant to be small and easily embedded. Those are great things if you need to run in a network/disk constrained environment, but for a server? Why waste CPU cycles using a libc that is, by design, less time efficient?

source

Sort:hotnew top

486@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

Debian is superior for server tasks. musl is designed to optimize for smaller binaries on disk. Memory is a secondary goal, and cpu time is a non-goal. musl isn’t meant to be fast, it’s meant to be small and easily embedded.

I’ve used Alpine on servers a lot and didn’t notice any performance difference when compared to glibc in the vast majority of cases. This performance comparison even suggests that musl is quite a bit faster in some cases and in most instances at least as fast as glibc, which matches my experience.

source