Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 2 Mar 2005 09:25:59 -0800 (PST)
From:      "Kamal R. Prasad" <kamalpr@yahoo.com>
To:        Lucas Holt <luke@foolishgames.com>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: sched_4BSD
Message-ID:  <20050302172559.99964.qmail@web52702.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <d6393363e38190175c60ba82b67fe971@foolishgames.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--- Lucas Holt <luke@foolishgames.com> wrote:

> Wouldn't a multi threaded program potentially need
> more cpu time than 
> vi?  

No. That is not a given.

> Multithreaded apps are created to do a lot of
> computation or 
> because they have a lot of concurrent activity that
> might block right?
> 
Threads are meant to take advantage of concurrency. 
Maybe the freebsd implementation should implement NPTL
in entirety.

> 
> On Mar 1, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >>
> >
> > If you make 1000 threads, you get 1000 slots on
> the scheduler. (last 
> > time I looked..
> > Let me know if I'm wrong).
> >
depends on whether it is defined to execute in system
scope or not.

regards
-kamal


=====
------------------------------------------------------------
Kamal R. Prasad
UNIX systems consultant 
kamalp@acm.org

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is:-).
------------------------------------------------------------

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050302172559.99964.qmail>