[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: debate on 700 threads vs asynchronous code
Lee Chin wrote:
> Hi
> I am discussing with a few people on different approaches to solving a scale problem I am having, and have gotten vastly different views
> In a nutshell, as far as this debate is concerned, I can say I am writing a web server.
> Now, to cater to 700 clients, I can
> a) launch 700 threads that each block on I/O to disk and to the client (in reading and writing on the socket)
> OR
> b) Write an asycnhrounous system with only 2 or three threads where I manage the connections and stack (via setcontext swapcontext etc), which is progromatically a little harder

You could also write something with async non-blocking IO and use NO threads
(ie, just a single process), which
may greatly simplify the debugging of your program (unless the developer(s) on your
project are very good at threaded programming already).

I suspect the async IO will perform better as well, but that is just an
un-founded opinion based on not wanting to think about scheduling 700 processes
that want to do IO :)

> Which way will yeild me better performance, considerng both approaches are implemented optimally?
> Thanks
> Lee

Ben Greear <> <Ben_Greear AT>
President of Candela Technologies Inc

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.058 / U:7.892 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site