Nelson Minar wrote:
>
> >All that other discussion about Linux process table slots and
> >implementation details is interesting, but not really relevant to the
> >distinction between light and heavy.
>
> There's one important difference - you can only have as many threads
> in Linux as you can have processes. And there's a suprisingly low
> upper limit on that, something like 256? I'm one of those wacky people
> who likes the idea of writing programs with thousands of threads (most
> stopped most of the time), so that's a bit of a drag.
I hope I didn't imply that the process table slots are a non-issue...
just that they're not central to the distinction between light- and
heavy-weight. But I'm always curious about "wacky people" who like to
use thousands of threads (or tons of memory or zillions of levels of
recursion, etc.). Is that approach fundamental to solving the problem
efficiently, or do you use it because it's convenient and/or cool?
Nathan Meyers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
