Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:47:23 +0200 From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: worker thread performance question Message-ID: <41C094CB.9010009@he.iki.fi> In-Reply-To: <41C092EA.7060100@elischer.org> References: <41C0898E.3090005@he.iki.fi> <41C092EA.7060100@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: > > > Petri Helenius wrote: > >> >> With libpthread is it usually optimal to have as many worker threads >> (CPU bound stuff) as kern.threads.virtual_cpu or have, say double the >> number so that there is always a thread in the run queue when another >> hits a mutex or sleep? > > > Are they always runnable? Almost, except when they run into shared structures which obviously are minimized by design. > theoretically you can schedule as many as you want. > any number > NCPU should keep teh system busy, but > I'm not sure I fully understand the question. The question was aimed towards if larger runqueue takes more CPU to maintain than a shorter one does and if threads are involuntarily switched. Pete > >> >> >> Pete >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-threads@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-threads-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41C094CB.9010009>