Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Apr 1997 18:42:49 -0400 (EDT) | From | Todd Graham Lewis <> | Subject | Re: Threads question |
| |
On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, David S. Miller wrote:
> Still, though, there are legitimate applications wherein having > multiple thousands of threads necessary. The most active IRC > server on the net, from what I understand, is a FreeBSD Pentium > which can accept ~1500 (this is from memory) connections. > > Why do you need 1500 threads to service 1500 connections? The answer > is you don't (...) > Perhaps 30 threads or so to get some extra parallelism in there, but > really not much more before you start hanging yourself.
Sure, it's not an optimal solution, but it's an _easy_ solution. The thread model of programming makes it much easier, conceptually, to write your server. You write a generic deal-with-client function, generate one thread per client, and let the thread library worry about multiplexing your i/o, etc.
It seems to me that threads can be and are used as a tool to ease program complexity through these sorts of methods. Maybe I'm not expressing it well, but I still think there's a case to be made. Then again, maybe I never took CS 101. 8^)
__ Todd Graham Lewis MindSpring Enterprises tlewis@mindspring.com
| |