From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Apr 27 13: 8:35 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58ECC37B422 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:08:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f3RK8Qd06823; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:08:26 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Daniel Eischen Cc: Nate Williams , Matt Dillon , Julian Elischer , Arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: KSE threading support (first parts) Message-ID: <20010427130826.G18676@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <15081.50170.297579.938254@nomad.yogotech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from eischen@vigrid.com on Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 03:50:11PM -0400 X-all-your-base: are belong to us. Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Daniel Eischen [010427 12:50] wrote: > On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Nate Williams wrote: > > > Well, that's complete bullshit. KSE's are extremely short-running > > > affairs in kernel mode, especially when you consider the most likely > > > asynchronizing case (a simple blocking situation that will most commonly > > > be in a read() or write()). > > > > Not necessarily. My experience with developing and running applications > > on Solaris says that having multiple KSE's/process is a *huge* win. > > You do know that the proposed implementation isn't quite like > Solaris (KSEs don't get their own quantum). You better holler > if you want it ;-) There's two things on the issue that I'd like to bring up. The concepts are cool, however the implementation you guys are discussion really hurt my head, not in a bad way, but conceptually the concepts look quite daunting. Kudos if you guys get it done though! Being able to have threads used in a "this application wants to utilize _all_ available system reasources" meaning if you have more than one processor, I want to see mysql, apache, whatever using it (by default!). If your model doesn't include this then please don't bother continuing, the stability issues versus the gain don't work for me at all. Sorry, correctness is sort of out of style nowadays especially since every other OS allows this and totes the performance gains of thier system. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [alfred@freebsd.org] Represent yourself, show up at BABUG http://www.babug.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message