Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 23 Sep 2002 19:03:06 -0500 | | From | Andy Isaacson <> | | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1 |
| |
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 10:32:00PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > The programs which benefit from N:M are exactly those which don't behave > > the way you describe. [...] > > 90% of the programs that matter behave exactly like Larry has described. > IO is the main source of blocking. Go and profile a busy webserver or > mailserver or database server yourself if you dont believe it.
There are heavily-threaded programs out there that do not behave this way, and for which a N:M thread model is completely appropriate. For example, simulation codes in operations research are most naturally implemented as one thread per object being simulated, with virtually no IO outside the simulation. The vast majority of the computation time in such a simulation is spent doing small amounts of work local to the thread, then sending small messages to another thread via a FIFO, then going to sleep waiting for more work.
Of course this can be (and frequently is) implemented such that there is not one Pthreads thread per object; given simulation environments with 1 million objects, and the current crappy state of Pthreads implementations, the researchers have no choice.
-andy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |