Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 13:22:52 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. Message-ID: <20030402132252.23f4e6f3.Alexander@Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <3E8A9101.66FE4135@mindspring.com> References: <20030402070515.40396.qmail@web41803.mail.yahoo.com> <3E8A9101.66FE4135@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:28:01 -0800 Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> wrote: > The primary performance reasoning behind a 1:1 kernel threading > implementation, relative to the user space single kernel entry > scheduler in the libc_r implementation is SMP scalability for > threaded applications. I think Jeff (or someone else?) said, that some web browsers gain "something" too (serialization issues with libc_r)? I had the impression that this also applies to UP systems. Do I misremember this? If not, does it not apply to UP systems as well? Bye, Alexander. -- Actually, Microsoft is sort of a mixture between the Borg and the Ferengi. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030402132252.23f4e6f3.Alexander>