Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Oct 2006 10:27:03 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
To:        Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Paul Allen <nospam@ugcs.caltech.edu>, Lev Serebryakov <lev@freebsd.org>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: KSE, libpthread & libthr: almost newbie question
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.0610281026020.12299@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <20061028104741.Q69980@fledge.watson.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> <20061028104741.Q69980@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Robert Watson wrote:

>
> 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.

I think it exposes all threads to the OS.  I think "green threads"
was its own threading.  You should ask -java, though.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0610281026020.12299>