Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Oct 2006 10:48:52 +0100 (BST)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Cc:        Paul Allen <nospam@ugcs.caltech.edu>, Lev Serebryakov <lev@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: KSE, libpthread & libthr: almost newbie question
Message-ID:  <20061028104741.Q69980@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <45429703.8070305@elischer.org>
References:  <917908193.20061027102647@serebryakov.spb.ru> <20061027103924.F79313@fledge.watson.org> <45426071.7020403@elischer.org> <602423478.20061028001449@serebryakov.spb.ru> <4542896D.1050001@elischer.org> <20061027231642.GJ30707@riyal.ugcs.caltech.edu> <45429703.8070305@elischer.org>

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

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Julian Elischer wrote:

> there is class of problems (e.g. some java programs) that have THOUSANDS of 
> threads, each representing an active aspect of some object. How do you put 
> an rlimit on that without either 1/ stopping the program from working or 2/ 
> allowing thousands of threads to exist but not screwing other users.

Does the JVM actually expose thousands of threads to the OS, or does it 
actually do its own M:N threading internally based on its execution model? 
My impression is the latter, exposing threads to the OS only when it needs 
them to consume kernel or CPU resources.

Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061028104741.Q69980>