I was just following the conversation but I am convinced now. For the record, I am running two "pretty regular" web-oriented servers: web, db, email, lists, dns, some low band streaming, no fileserving and no nat or any type of routing.
I've used nptl before, but I gave up because I had some problems running turck-mmcache on a nptl-only apache. Since mmcache is obsolete and not used on the server anymore I see no problem switching back to a nptl-only environment. Although I think I know all the steps I am supposed to do, I would really appreciate it if some would point out the "migration" steps, just in case I don't miss some important stage. Thank you guys. -----Original Message----- From: J. Ryan Earl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 august 2005 18:44 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [gentoo-server] nptl Billy Holmes wrote: > This makes it easier and faster for the kernel to context switch > between processes (and threads within a process). > > A prime example of this is a test from the LKML, where Ulrich Drepper > wrote he was able to start and stop 100,000 threads in about 2 > seconds. In further messages, Ingo Molnar confirms this and also > points out that before these changes, it would have taken upwards to > 15 minutes for the same thing. > > http://kerneltrap.org/node/422 Absolutely true. NPTL is drastically more scalable than linuxthreads. For instance, spawn 1000 worker threads in a JVM and the scheduling overhead alone will cause the system to become unresponsive across the board. Use NPTL and you can get 10000 threads all running no problem. -ryan -- [email protected] mailing list -- [email protected] mailing list
