Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 14:59:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: Kai Mosebach <kai.mosebach@freshx.de> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: AW: LinuxThreads replacement Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10307091454030.26667-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <001b01c3463a$0f907a00$0100a8c0@alpha>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Kai Mosebach wrote: > Currently, im porting the SapDB (www.sapdb.org) to FreeBSD > (www.komadev.de/sapdb), which makes heavy use of the lthreads, but > > 1.) isnt running stable on 5.1 (not sure whether its a lthreads problem) > 2.) is not the fastest (i guess) > 3.) has more (especially memory) overhead > > for example, for on database instance, there are about 80 (lthread) > processes hanging around. > > So i thought of a simple complete recompiling. > > Would you more likely use libthr or libkse, > as kse is not complete yet, isnt it ? KSE seems to be working pretty well for me. I'd suggest giving it a try. Once you compile with either libthr or libkse, you can easily use the other library just by copying one over the other or by using libmap.conf. To date, both libthr and libkse can be drop-in replacements for the other (and libc_r). If you have problems getting SapDB to compile with libthr or libkse, try libc_r (due to some autoconfig and libtool assumptions, it may be easier to use libc_r). Once you get it built with libc_r, you can drop-in libthr or libkse for libc_r. -- Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10307091454030.26667-100000>