Sorry for this post to devel: but it took toad 3 months to answer this on the Bugtracker...
>>Obviously they are created somewhere, so why are there 800 - 1200 threads >>running the same time? (which is in facht the same as zothar mentions) >So what? 2.6 handles lots of threads quite efficiently, especially if you turn >NPTL on (java 1.5.0_08 may partly fix the lost-locks bug, and even if it >doesn't the price is an occasional self-restart). If you really ask this question I really ask myself what kind of Developer you are. Obviously you grew up with Garbage Collectors and the preemptive Multitasking... and you obviously never heard about effeciency... Many Javadevelopers seem to have that problem. They don't care about effeciency because its dual Core 64 bit machine will solve any Problems in their inefficient code. But to have 1000 Threads the same time is just stupid. Even if they got handled well. Each Context Switch is expensive. Thread I read some nice Threads in suns forum... horror. Threads are expensive. Freenet already uses far too much resources. And its still alpha. I dont know how many threads are now, but I am sure not less than 3 months ago. I really ask you to get some lessons about Programming with multiple threads. I am really shocked about your question... this is just ridicoulus... Some comments on Suns Forum: "I agree: a large number of threads can be problematic. On workstation/server -class systems a few dozen is ok, a few hundred starts getting problematic." What the hell are you doing with over 1000 threads? And you really ask why freenet is slow? Gosh sometimes I can't believe this... Kind Regards
