Here is the Java version http://docs.paralleluniverse.co/quasar/ but I still don't see how user level scheduling can be beneficial (This is a well debated problem)? How can this add to the performance? or say why is user level scheduling necessary Given the Thread per core design and the callback mechanism?
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Avi Kivity <a...@scylladb.com> wrote: > Scylla uses a the seastar framework, which provides for both user-level > thread scheduling and simple run-to-completion tasks. > > Huge pages are limited to 2MB (and 1GB, but these aren't available as > transparent hugepages). > > > On 03/11/2017 10:26 PM, Kant Kodali wrote: > > @Dor > > 1) You guys have a CPU scheduler? you mean user level thread Scheduler > that maps user level threads to kernel level threads? I thought C++ by > default creates native kernel threads but sure nothing will stop someone to > create a user level scheduling library if that's what you are talking about? > 2) How can one create THP of size 1KB? According to this post > <https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Performance_Tuning_Guide/s-memory-transhuge.html> > it > looks like the valid values 2MB and 1GB. > > Thanks, > kant > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Avi Kivity <a...@scylladb.com> wrote: > >> Agreed, I'd recommend to treat benchmarks as a rough guide to see where >> there is potential, and follow through with your own tests. >> >> On 03/11/2017 09:37 PM, Edward Capriolo wrote: >> >> >> Benchmarks are great for FUDly blog posts. Real world work loads matter >> more. Every NoSQL vendor wins their benchmarks. >> >> >> > > > >
