Comparison: Hard link and symbolic link-优快云博客

本文对比了硬链接和符号链接在不同条件下的优缺点。硬链接在名称解析速度、静态对象处理和对象存在要求方面表现更佳；而符号链接则在对象删除、动态对象属性更改速度及跨越文件系统方面更具优势。

摘要生成于 C知道，由 DeepSeek-R1 满血版支持，前往体验 >

When using path names in programs, you have a choice of using a hard link or a symbolic link (see Link). Each type of link has advantages and disadvantages. The conditions under which one type of link has an advantage over the other type is as follows:

Table 1. Comparison of Hard Link and Symbolic Link

Item	Hard Link	Symbolic Link
Name resolution	Faster. A hard link contains a direct reference to the object.	Slower. A symbolic link contains a path name to the object, which must be resolved to find the object.
Object existence	Required. An object must exist in order to create a hard link to it.	Optional. A symbolic link can be created when the object it refers to does not exist.
Object deletion	Restricted. All hard links to an object must be unlinked (removed) to delete the object.	Unrestricted. An object can be deleted even if there are symbolic links referring to it.
Dynamic objects (attributes change)	Slower. Many of the attributes of an object are stored in each hard link. Changes to a dynamic object, therefore, are slower as the number of hard links to the object increases.	Faster. Changes to a dynamic object are not affected by symbolic links.
Static objects (attributes do not change)	Faster. For a static object, name resolution is the primary performance concern. Name resolution is faster when hard links are used.	Slower. Name resolution is slower when symbolic links are used.
Scope	Restricted. Hard links cannot cross file systems.	Unrestricted. Symbolic links can cross file systems.