From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Dec 14 8:59:14 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88D4037B401 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:59:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.securesoftware.com (w168.z205158144.scl-ca.dsl.cnc.net [205.158.144.168]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC0C943ED1 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:59:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bob@securesoftware.com) Received: from [192.168.0.213] (unknown [66.45.36.250]) by mail.securesoftware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 548251344AE; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:03:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Threads in FreeBSD From: Bob Fleck To: Nathan Arun Cc: arch@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1039884977.71245.1.camel@mcp.securesoftware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.0 Date: 14 Dec 2002 11:56:17 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 15:51, Nathan Arun wrote: > Thanks to everyone who replied. > > I'm not a kernel programmer and wouldn't know the relative merits of > different threading architectures. Purely as an FYI, here is a white paper I > came across on the internet. This is by a Redhat developer: > http://people.redhat.com/drepper/nptl-design.pdf, who argues that 1-on-1 > implementation is the best. And some benchmarks to prove it is here: > http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2002/11/07/linux_threads.html?page=2 > (though this is Linux) There has been a pretty extensive, and informative, discussion on this paper on this list already. Check the archives, it starts on September 19th. Bob To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message