Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 22:42:02 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: eischen@vigrid.com (Daniel Eischen), jasone@canonware.com (Jason Evans), smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP meeting summary Message-ID: <200006260442.WAA15731@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <200006251736.KAA09884@usr02.primenet.com> References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000625091445.2784A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> <200006251736.KAA09884@usr02.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Dynix had no problem with 32 processors. Most SVR4 variants, and > I will include Solaris in this, use mutex protection of structures, > and start to fall down drastically over 4 processors. Amazing that you say this, yet I see extremely good results on Solaris boxes up to 64 processors. Suffice it to say that I'm not convinced, nor am I convinced that mutex's around data structures is any different than critical sectioning. They are essentially the same thing, in that the critical section is almost always the code that deals with a particular (shared) data structure. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006260442.WAA15731>