From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Jul 15 11:42:49 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from shell.webmaster.com (mail.webmaster.com [209.133.28.73]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 876E1154A7 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:42:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from whenever ([209.133.29.2]) by shell.webmaster.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35) with SMTP id com; Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:41:51 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Terry Lambert" , "Tani Hosokawa" Cc: Subject: RE: Known MMAP() race conditions ... ? Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:41:51 -0700 Message-ID: <000f01becef1$b3d4cae0$021d85d1@youwant.to> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0 In-Reply-To: <199907151834.LAA28562@usr07.primenet.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > There is no "require" about it. Threads are a tool, and equivalent > (and lower overhead) tools exist. > > The idea that threads are necessary at all is a psychological > crutch. It has more to do with the inability of programmers > to maintain state in a per connection structure, rather than > on a stack. It's a programmer problem, in other words, based > in procedural (rather than data flow) based ways of thinking. Okay, then, explain to me how you do 3,000 concurrent 'gethostbyname' calls without writing your own resolver. Explain to me how you make a webserver that doesn't block if a disk write gets delayed without using one process per request. I will admit that there are always ways to avoid threads. Sure. There was no task that was impossible before they existed. But paradigm bigotry is as silly as operating system bigotry. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message